0 

0  ^^,„ 

4 
6 
4 


im     THE  ARABIC  VERSIONS 


lalifornia 

gional 

cility 


OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 
IN  THE  CHURCH  OF  EGYPT 


A  STUDY  FROM  MANUSCRIPT  SOURCES 
(IX— XVII  CENTURY) 

BY 

JOSEPH  FRANCIS  RHODE,  0.  F.  M., 

DR.  PHIL.  ET  THEOL.,  S.  SCRIPT.  LIC. 


ST.  LOUIS,  MO. 
B.  HERDER  BOOK  COMPANY 

1921 


r 


•^ ; 


[THE  ARABIC  VERSIONS 

OF   THE   PENTATEUCH 
IN  THE  CHURCH  OF  EGYPT 


^ 

y 


/^<'^ 


A  STUDY  FROM  MANUSCRIPT  SOUKCES 
(IX— XVII  CENTURY) 

BY 

J(3SEPH  FRANCIS  RHODE,  0.  F.  M., 

DE.  PHIL.  ET  THEOl!,  S.  SCRIPT.  LlC. 


ST.  LOUIS,  MO. 

B.  HERDER  BOOK  COMPANY 

1921 


THE  AEABIC  VERSIONS 

OF  THE  PENTATEUCH 

IN  THE  CHURCH  OF  EGYPT 


Ex  parte  nostra  nihil  obstat  iiuominus  imprimatur. 

Eoroae.  die  1<>  Martii  VJU 
L.  S. 

Fk,  Pacu-icus  Mokza. 
Min.  Glis  0.  F.  M. 

Imprimatur. 

Fb.  Albebtus  Lei'idi  0.  P 
S.  P.  A.  Magister. 

Imprimatur. 

Feanciscus  Faberi, 
Vic.  Urbis  Adsessor. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

Pago 

Preface 9 

INTRODUCTION 

The  C'liristiau  Arabic  Versions,  a  field  practically  unexplored   ...  11 

Rise  and  Development  of  the  Arabic  Versions  in  general 13 

The  Origin,  Age  and  Nature  of  the  Arabic  Versions  in  Egypt,  an 

obscure  and  unsolved  problem 18 

Question  must  be  decided  from  Study  of  MS8 23 

PART  I 

DESCRIPTION  AND  COMPARATIVE  STUDY  OF  THE 

MANUSCRIPTS 

CHAPTER  I 

GENERAL  NOTICE  ON  THE  MANUSCRIPTS  OF  THE 

ARABIC  PKNTATEUCH 

A.  The  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

List  of  the  MSS - 27 

What  has  been  Published   of  these  MSS 28 

B.  MSS.  Containing  the  Pentateuch  in  Arabic  only 

Catalogue  of  the  More  Important  MSS 29 

a)  In  the  Florentine  Library      30 

b)  In  the  Vatican  Library 30 

c)  In  the  Royal  Library  at  Berlin 30 

d)  In  the  Imperial  library  at  \'ienna 30 

e)  In  the  Royal  State  Library  at  Munich 30 

f)  In  the  Liljrary  of  the  Leyden  Academy 31 

g)  In  the  British  Museum 31 

h)  In  the  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford 31 

i)   In  the  National  Library  at  Paris 32 

CHAPTFR  II 

THE  COPTO-ARABIC  MSS.  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH 

List  of  the  Arabic  and  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  utilized  in  this  Study  .  34 

List  of  Abbreviations 34 

1)  Vatican  Library  Copt.  1  ^  A 35 

2)  Vatican  Library  Copt.  2— 4  =  B 42 


6  Table  of  ContctUs 

Pitge 

3)  B.  K.  Paris.  Copt.  1  =  C id 

4)  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  33=  D b-2 

0)  British  Museum  or.  422  =  G 54 

CHAPTER  ni 
THE  ARABIC  MSS.  OF  THE  NATIONAL  LIBRAltY  AT  PARIS 

1)  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12  =  F 57 

2)  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  16  =  H 61 

3)  B.  X.  Paris.  Ar.  9  =  L 70 

4)  B.  N.  Paris  Ar.  10  =  M 74 

5)  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  11  =  0 7.") 

6)  B.  X.  Paris.  Ar.  18  =  P 78 

CHAPTER  1\ 
THE  ARABIC  MSS.  OF  THE  BODLEIAN  LIBRARY  AT  OXFORD 

1)  Bodl.  Libr.  Laud.  or.  272  =  E      80 

2)  Bodl.  Libr.  Pocock.  219  =  K 82 

3)  Bodl.  Libr.  Marsh.  440  =  N 87 

4)  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424=  X 89 

CHAPTER  V 

THE  REMAINING  MANUSCRIPTS  AND  THE  PRINTED  EDITIONS 

CONSULTED  AND  COLLATED  IN  THIS  STUDY 

1)  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  =  S 94 

Florentine  MS.  Palat.  orient.  112  (XXI)  =  \ 95 

Variants  from  "Walton's  Polyglot"  =  W 95 

2)  Printed  Editions  Consulted  and  Collated 

A.  Liturgical  Books  Edited  by  Tuki  =  T '.    .  97 

List  of  Pentateuch  Lections  Occurring  in  the  Euchologium  .  98 

B.  Horner's    "Service    for    the    Consecration    of  Church    and 
Altar"  =  R 99 

CHAPTER  VI 
GROUPING  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS.  THEIR  MUTUAL  RELATION 

Two  Main  Groups  of  MSS 100 

Relation  between  the  MSS.  of  the  First  Group 101 

Relation  between  the  MSS.  of  the  Second  Group 102 

CHAPTER  VII 

TEXTUAL  AND  LITURGICAL  DIVISIONS. 

SECTIONS  AND  LECTIONS 

A.  Sections  Marked  in  the  MSS 106 

List  of  Sections  Found  in  the  First  Group  ("H") 107 

List  of  Sections  from  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4  ("H  bis") 109 

List  of  Sections  Found  in  the  Second  Group  ("AS") HI 


Table  of  Contents  7 

Page 

B.  Lections  Noted  in  the  MSS 113 

1.  List  of  Lections  in  Genesis  (MSS.  of  I.  grouij) 114 

Lections  are  those  of  the  Melkite  Church llo 

2.  Lections  in  MSS.  of  II.  grouji  are  those  of  the  Coptic  Churrh  115 
List  of  Lections  in  Genesis  (IMSS.  of  II.  group) 116 

CONCLUSION 

The  Results  of  this  Study 117 

APPENDIX  I 

Note  found  on  a  Double  Fly-leaf  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  12 119 

APPENDIX  II 
Last  page  (fol.   6"^)  of  the  Introduction  preceding  Genesis  in  MS. 

Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424 120 


PART  II 

TEXTS 

SECTION  I 

Normal  Text  of  Group  I.    (MSS.  H,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P) 3* 

SECTION  II 
Normal  Text  of  Group  II.     (MSS.  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  G) 18* 

SECTION  III 
Text  of  MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  (S) 36* 

SECTION  IV 
Text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424  (X) 50* 


PREFACE 

This  Study  is  founded,  almost  exclusively,  on  an  extensive 
examination  of  manuscripts  and  embodies  the  results  of  in- 
vestigations made  whilst  pursuing  my  Semitic  studies  at  the 
Catholic  University  of  America. 

The  great  world-war,  which  broke  out  when  the  first  proof- 
sheets  were  off  the  press,  has  delayed  publication  for  nearly 
seven  years.  Yet  I  hope  that  even  now  this  treatise  will  prove, 
in  some  small  degree,  a  helpful  contribution  to  the  history  of 
the  Oriental  versions  of  the  Scriptures  and  that  indulgence 
will  be  shown  to  its  shortcomings  by  Semitic  scholars. 

It  is  my  pleasing  duty  to  express  my  gratitude  to  Prof. 
Dr.  H.  Hyvernat,  not  only  for  the  constant  and  manifold 
encouragement  that  he  has  given  me  in  the  preparation  of 
this  treatise,  but  also  for  the  uniform  care  and  kindness  with 
which  he  directed  my  Semitic  studies.  To  this  eminent  scholar 
I  owe  it  that  I  undertook  the  work  at  all,  and  I  have  to 
thank  him  also  for  a  generous  loan  of  notes  and  transcripts 
of  portions  of  the  texts. 

To  Prof.  Dr.  Pk.  Coln  and  to  Dr.  A.  Vaschalde  I  am 
indebted  for  many  useful  hints  and  valuable  remarks  in  the 
class-room.  To  Dr.  C<iLN,  especially,  I  have  to  acknowledge 
my  deep'  obligation  for  much  kind  interest  and  advice  during 
the  progress  of  my  study,  for  happy  suggestions  toward  the 
correct  reading  of  many  difficult  and  almost  illegible  words 
and  expressions  in  the  manuscripts,  and  for  generous  assistance 
in  seeing  the  work  through  the  press. 

Washington,  D.  C.  J.  F.  Khoue. 

Sept.  3,  192(1. 


INTRODUCTION 

In  the  first  volume  of  the  new  hirger  Cambridge  edition ' 
of  tlie  Old  Testament  in  Greek,  where  the  "substantial  variants 
foimd  in  the  chief  ancient  versions  made  from  the  Septuagint"  ^ 
are  carefully  noted,  it  is  remarkable  that  no  mention -whatever 
is  made  of  the  Arabic  translations  of  the  Pentateuch.  This 
is  all  the  more  surj^rising  as  Holmes  and  Parsons  in  their 
monumental  work^  had  collected  the  different  readings  (speak- 
ing of  the  Pentateuch  only)  of  four  Arabic  MSS.  in  the  Bod- 
leian Library. 

The  reason  for  this  exclusion  on  the  part  of  the  modern 
editors  can  hardly  be  looked  for  in  the  opinion  commonly 
admitted  among  scholars,  though  perhaps  never  clearly  demon- 
strated, that  the  Arabic  translation  of  the  Septuagint  is  merely 
"a  version  of  a  version'"  derived  from  the  Coptic  or  from  the 
Syro-hexaplar;  for  by  applying  this  criterion  the  variants  of 
the  Ethiopic  text,  too,  would  have  to  be  ruled  out. 

We  are  rather  inclined  to  believe  that  the  learned  editors 
were  influenced  in  their  course  by  the  consciousness  of  the 
scanty  supply  of  material  available  for  critical  notes,  and  which 
is  due  to  the  vague  and  imperfect  knowledge  we  even  now 
possess  of  the  Arabic  versions  of  the  Scriptures  in  general, 
and  in  particular  of  those  translations  which  represent,  faith- 
fully or  only  approximately,  the  Greek  version  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

1  The  Old  Testament  in  Greek,  edited  by  Allan  England  Brooke  and 
NoKMAN  McLean.  Volume  I.  The  Ootateuoh.  Parts  I — III,  Genesis  to 
Deuteronomy  iuel.  Cambridge  1900—1911. 

2  Prefatory  note,  p.  I. 

'  Vetus  Testamentum  cum  variia  Lectionibus.  Edidit  Robert  Holmes. 
Tomus  I.     Oxonii  1798. 


12  •        Introduciion 


For  while  the  Jewish-Arabic  and  the  Samaritan-Arabic 
Pentateuch  have  received  considerable  attention  at  the  hands 
of  Orientalists*,  the  C/ir(s^'aH-Arabic  Pentateuch  versions 
never  have,  as  far  as  we  know,  formed  the  subject  of  scientific 
inquiry  by  a  Semitic  scholar.  There  are  extant,  it  is  true,  a 
few  essays  on  the  Arabic  version  of  certain  books  of  Holy 
Writ  as  it  is  found  in  the  Polyglots  2,  as  well  as  an  important 
study  on  the  Arabic  version  of  the  Psalms  by  C.  Dodeelein 
(Eichhokn's  Repertorium  fur  Biblische  and  Morgenliindische 


'  See  the  ,,Literaturubersicht"  given  by  P.  Kahle  in  bis  work  "Die 
arabischen  Bibelubersetzungen',  Leipzig  1904.  p.  VllI— XII.  We  may 
add  two  articles  by  0.  G.  Ttchses:  "Cber  die  Quelle,  aus  welcher  die 
Handschrift  der  arabischen  Version  in  den  Polyglotten  geflossen  ist" 
(EicHHORs's  Repertorium  fiir  Biblische  und  Moi-genlandisehe  Litteratur. 
Leipzig  1781,  X,  p.  95sqq.),  and  "Untersuchung,  ob  R.  Saadjah  Haggaon 
Verfasser  der  arabischen  Ubersetzuug  des  Pentateuchs  in  den  Polyglotten 
sei"  (ib.  XI,  p.  82sqq.);  also  Fbiedr.  Schndkrek,  Dissertationes  Philolo- 
gicae,  tiothae  1790,  p.  191—238:  De  Pentateucho  Arabico  Polyglotto;  ib. 
p.  501:  Additamenta  ad  Dissert,  de  Pent.  Arab.  Polyglotto  (cfr.  J.  Micha- 
ELiB,  Orientalisehe  und  Exegetische  Bibliothek  vol.  XV,  p.  02—75);  Pro- 
legomena Briani  Waltonii  in  Bibb'a  I'olyglotta  recognovit  Dathiaiiisque  et 
variorum  notis  suas  immiscuit  Fbakciscls  Wrasgham,  Canlabrigiae  1828, 
vol.  II,  p.  554 — 571. 

Then  the  classic  dissertation  on  the  Samaritan-Arabic  Pentateuch  by 
SiLVESTRE  DE  Sacy:  "Memoire  sur  la  Version  Arabe  des  Livres  de  Moise 
a  I'usage  des  Samaritains'".  in  the  Memoires  de  TAcademie  des  Inscrip- 
tions et  Belles-lettres,  tome  XLIX,  Paris  1808,  p.  1— 199.  —  Fr.  Schscerer, 
tjber  den  Samaritanisch-Arabisolien  Pentateuch,  (Eichhorx's  AUg.  Biblio- 
thek der  biblisehen  Litteratur  111,  p.  814—827),  Ciua.  van  Vlotes,  Spe- 
cimen philologicum  versionis  Samaritanae  Arabicae  Pentateuchi  Mosaici, 
Lugduno  Batavorum  1803.  Andr.  Christ.  Hwiid,  Specimen  ineditae  ver- 
sionis Arabicae-Samaritanae  Pentateuchi.  Literae  accedunt  Auo.  Akt. 
Georgii,  Eremitae  Augustiniani,  de  variis  Arabicorum  versionum  generi- 
bus,  Romae  1780  (cfr.  Michaelis,  Orient,  und  Exeg.  Biblioth.  vol.  XV, 
p.  978qq.)  Useful  infonnation  on  the  different  kinds  of  versions  of  the 
Arabic  Pentateuch  may  be  gleaned  from  the  dissertation  of  H.  E.  G.  Pad- 
Lus,  Specimina  Versionum  Pentateuchi  septem  Arabicarum  nondum  edi- 
tarum  e  bibl.  Oxon.  Bodlejana  exhibita.    Jena  1789. 

2  Samcel  G.  Waid,  L'ber  die  arabische  Ubersetzung  des  Daniel  in 
den  Polyglotten  (Eichhoen's  Repertorium,  XIV,  p.  204 sqq.).  Abuil. 
RoEDiGER,  De  Origine  et  Indole  Arabicae  Librorum  V.  T.  Historieorum 
Interpretationis  Libri  Duo,  Ualis  Saxonum  1829. 


Introduction  1 3 


Litteratur,  Leipzig  1777,  II,  p.  152sqq.,  and  1778,  IV,  p.  57sqq.); 
and,  as  far  as  the  Gospels  are  concerned,  the  excellent 
monograph  by  I.  Guidi,  La  Traduzione  degli  Evangelii  in 
Arabo  e  in  Etiopico,  Roma  1888  (Atti  della  Reale  Aca- 
demia  dei  Lincei,  anno  CCLXXXV,  Serie  Quarta,  Vol.  IV, 
pp.  5—37)  1. 

The  Christian-Arabic  versions  of  the  Pentateuch,  however, 
present  to  the  student  a  field  practically  unexplored  up  to  the 
present  time.  The  material,  in  consequence,  will  have  to  be 
drawn  almost  exclusively  from  manuscript  sources,  and  this 
circumstance  naturally  implies  considerable  limitation  on  the 
part  of  the  investigator.  For  this  reason  we  have  restricted 
our  Study  to  such  Arabic  versions  of  the  Pentateuch  as  seemed 
to  have  been  current  in  the  CJmrch  of  Ejijjpt,  and  we  may 
note  in  advance  that  on  the  Arabic  versions  used  in  this  an- 
cient and  renowned  Church  nothing  at  all  has  ever  been  pub- 
lished 2. 

Before  entering  on  our  subject  it  will  not  be  amiss  to 
place  before  the  reader  whatever  is  known  or  is  supposed  to 


'  See  also  the  general  remarks  on  early  Arabic  Versions  of  the  Bible 
by  G.  Graf  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  treatise  on  the  Christian-Arabic 
Literature  up  to  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century  (Die  christlich-arabische 
Literatur  bis  zur  frankischen  Zeit,  Freiburg  im  Breisgau  IfK).")) ;  H.  Goussen's 
essay  on  the  Christian-Arabic  Literature  of  the  Mozarabs  (Die  cbristlich- 
arabische  Literatur  der  Mozaraber,  Leipzig  1909;  the  same  author  an- 
nounced an  essay  on  the  "Copto-Ai-abio  Literature'',  which,  however,  has 
not  yet  appeared);  and  the  instructive  essay  by  Chr.  Fb.  Schnurree, 
Locus  de  UtUitate  Linguae  Arabicae  ad  Critioam  Veteris  Testament! 
exemplis  illustratus,  Orationum  Academicarum  Delectus  Postunius,  Tu- 
bingae  18ii8,  p.  245—254. 

'  G.  Graf,  op.  cit.  p.  6 — 24,  speaks  of  a  Palestinian,  Syrian  and 
Spanish  (Magribian)  early  Christian  Arabic  literature;  the  Egyptian  he 
excludes  from  his  sketch  as  being  of  too  recent  date:  "Aus  dem  Bereiche 
der  koptischen  Sprache  gind  uns,  soviel  bis  jetzt  bekannt,  keine  arabischen 
Ubersetzungen  aus  der  Zeit  bis  zum  10.  und  11.  Jahrhundert  Uberkommen" 
(p.  7).  Even  C.  Brockelmann  has  not  a  word  to  say  about  the  Egyptian- 
Arabic  versions  in  his  History  of  Christian-Arabic  Literature  (Geschichte 
der  ohristlichen  Litteraturen  des  Orients,  2.  Ausgabe,  Leipzig  1909,  p.  67 
his  74,  Die  christlich-arabische  Literatur. 


1 4  LUroJitction 


be  known  of  the  genesis  of  the  Arabic  versions  in  general  and 
to  acquaint  him  briefly  with  the  many  ditticult  problems  which 
confront  the  scholar  in  his  investigation  as  to  the  origin,  age 
and  natuie  of  the  Arabic  versions  of  the  Bible  in  Egypt. 

The  history  of  the  Arabic  Bible  is  essentially  the  histoiy 
of  the  versions  made  for  the  use  of  the  native  population  of 
the  Christian  regions  of  Asia  and  Africa  that  were  overrun 
and  subdued  by  the  Mohammedan  hordes  about  the  middle 
of  the  seventh  century.  As  Christianity  had  admittedly  gained 
a  firm  foothold  in  Arabia '  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth 
century,  we  may  safely  assume  that  in  the  first  centuries  parts 
of  the  Bible,  more  especially  the  Gospels,  must  have  been 
translated  into  the  vernacular  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Arabian 
peninsula.  Still  there  is  no  positive  proof  of  the  existence  of 
any  version  of  the  Bible  in  Arabic  anterior  to  or  contemporary 
with  the  rise  of  the  Mohammedan  religion  at  the  beginning  of 
the  seventh  century  of  our  era. 

When  under  the  first  caliphs  Syria  was  conquered  (Abu 
Bekr's  army  taking  Damascus  in  G35),  Palestine  subdued  (Omar 
capturing  Jerusalem  in  638),  Egypt  made  tributary  (Alexandria 
opening  her  gates  in  641),  the  northern  coast  of  Africa 
devastated  by  the  Moslem  forces,  and  finally  in  711  even  the 
powerful  kingdom  of  the  Visigoths  in  Spa'ia  overthrown  by 
the  relentless  onslaught  of  Islam,  then  it  was  that  the  language 
of  the  conquerors,  too,  gradually  encroached  upon  the  native 
tongue  of  the  subjugated  nations.  Palestinian  Aramaic,  Syriac, 
Coptic  and  other  less  important  languages  waned  and  even- 
tually, though  only  after  several  centuries,  entirely  disappeared 
before  the  ever  growing  influence  and  importance  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Koran.  This  process  of  eliminating  the  old  and 
substituting  the  new-  vernacular  seems  to  have  taken  place 
faster  m  Palestine  and  Syria,  owing  to  the  greater  affinity 
between  the  Ajrabic  and  the  Aramaic  dialects;  in  fact,  about 


'  J.  Wkli.hausbk,  Rest*  arabischen  Heidentums,  U.  Ausgabe,  Berlin 
1897,  p.  231—234.    Compare  also  Act.  Apost.  2,  11. 


Introduction  15 


the  year  800  Arabic  i  was  the  language  universally  spoken  in 
the  territory  of  the  Aramaic  tongue  2. 

But  what  was  the  fate  of  the  Arabic  language  in  the 
valley  of  the  Nile?  what  its  influence  upon  the  subjugated 
Christian  population  of  Egypt?  Did  the  Arabic  idiom  entirely 
supersede  the  vernacular  Egyptian  dialects  there  also?  And 
if  so,  did  the  Coptic  give  way  to  the  Arabic  at  an  early  date 
or  only  after  many  centuries  of  persistent  struggle?  Did  the 
Christians  soon  feel  the  necessity  of  translating  their  Sacred 
Books  into  the  language  of  their  new  masters,  and  at  what 
time  precisely  did  they  set  about  to  meet  this  demand?  Was 
there  an  official  Arabic  version  of  the  Bible  in  the  Church 
of  Egypt,  or  were  there  several  authoritatively  recognized 
translations,  or  perhaps  only  private  attempts  to  bring  the 
contents  of  the  Scriptures  home  to  the  intelligence  of  the 
common  people?  All  these  are  questions  which  have  not  yet 
been  definitely  answered.  For  some  of  them  a  solution  is 
offered  devoid  for  the  most  part  of  any  scientific  value;  for 
others  an  attempt  at  a  satisfactory  solution  has  not  even  been 
made,  owing,  perhaps,  to  the  vague  and  groundless  opinion  so 
widely  prevalent  in  almost  all  text-books  on  Introduction  to 
the  Study  of  the  Bible  and  in  not  a  few  encyclopedia  articles 
on  the  versions  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  that  the 
Arabic  versions,  being  of  rather  late  origin,  are  of  no  import- 
ance whatever  for  textual  criticism  and  that  their  value  for 


1  Graf,  op.  cit.  p.  7. 

'  GuiDi,  in  Lis  article  on  the  Arabic  versions  of  the  Gospels  referred 
to  above,  holds  that  the  oldest  Arabic  version  (from  the  Greek)  was  made 
in  Palestine,  soon  after  the  Arabian  concjuest,  at  the  monastery  of  St. 
Sabbas  near  Jerusalem.  — ■  Yet,  as  to  the  liturgical  language,  Cyril  Cha- 
HOK,  Histoire  des  Patriarcats  Melkites,  Rome  1909,  tome  III,  p.  29 — 41, 
proves  on  the  authority  of  a  large  number  of  MSS.  that  the  Melkites 
of  Syria  for  the  most  part  used  Syriac  in  their  services  from  the  10th 
to  the  16  th  century.  Then  only  did  they  adopt  Arabic  as  liturgical 
language.  —  Compare  also  the  unpublished  treatise  of  E.  Renaudot:  "De 
I'antiquitc  des  versions  syriaque,  arabc,  ethiopienne  de  la  Bible"  preserved 
in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS.  Collect.  Renaudot,  vol.  I,  fol.  260—270. 


16  Introduction 


the  scientific  study  of  the  Scriptures  is  practically  nought. 
Thus,  e.  g.,  Cheyne  and  Black  devote  just  ten  lines  to  the 
Arabic  versions  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  vol.  IV  of  their 
Encyclopaedia  Biblica.  Few  and  meagre,  too,  are  the  notes 
on  the  Arabic  versions  by  A.  J.  Maas  in  his  article  on  the 
Versions  of  the  Bible  in  the  Catholic  Encyclopedia,  vol.  XV, 
pp.367 — 377. —  Excellent  monographs  on  the  Arabic  versions 
have  been  written  by  E.  Nestle  in  the  "Kealencyklopiidie  fiir 
protestantische  Theologie  und  Kirche"',  Dritte  Auflage,  vol.  Ill, 
p.  90 — 95  (in  condensed  form  Xes-tle's  article  is  found  in 
"The  New  ScHAFi'-HERZot;  Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Know- 
ledge", Funk  and  Wagnalls  publishers,  New  York,  vol.  Ill, 
p.  134 — 13.5);  by  F.  C.  Buekitx  in  Hastings  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  vol.  I.  p.  136 — 138;  and  by  H.  Ht\-eenat  in  the  Dic- 
tionnaire  de  la  Bible,  vol.  I,  col.  815 — 856. 

These  articles,  though  they  present  exhaustive  reviews  ot 
what  is  actually  known  as  to  the  origin  and  uature,  the 
manuscripts  and  printed  editions  of  the  Arabic  Bible,  also 
reveal  the  fact  that  we  really  know  but  very  little  of  the 
question  of  the  Arabic  versions  viewed  in  the  light  of  present 
day  scientific  research '. 

The  modern  editions  of  the  Arabic  Bible  by  the  Dominican 
Fathers,  in  4  vols.  (Mossul  1875 — 1878)  and  by  the  Jesuits, 
in  3  vols.  (Beyrout,  1876 — 1885),  both  representing  the  text 
of  the  Vulgate  (though  they  are  probably  based  upon  a  fair 
amount  of  ancient  manuscript  material  and  are  of  acknowledged 
merit  for  correctness  of  diction  and  elegance  of  style),  and 
the  Protestant  edition  of  Smith-van  Dyck  (Beyrout  1860 — 1865), 
justly  praised  for  its  simple  language  and  popular  tone,  cannot, 
it  is  plain,  be  of  great  use  for  textual  criticism;  neither  can 
the  Propaganda  edition  of  1671  according  to  the  Vulgate  and 

'  Treatises  like  the  one  found  in  Le  Loko's  Bibliotheca  Sacra  (con- 
tinuata  ab  Akdkea  (iottlieb  Mascb.  Halac  1781,  II  vol.  p.  103 — 139)  and 
in  Eichhorn's  Eiiileitung'  in  das  Alte  Testament,  (iottiiigon  1823,  II.  Hand, 
p.  230—319,  are  too  antiquated  to  be  of  any  actual  value  except  for  occa- 
sional reference. 


Introduction  1 7 


the  revised  edition  by  Tuki  in  1752  serve  such  a  purpose,  nor 
the  text  of  the  Paris  (1645)  and  Jjondon  (1657)  Polyglots', 
nor  the  numerous  reprints  oi'  these  editions,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  made  for  liturgical  use-  or  for  missionary  purposes. 

There  can,  however,  hardly  be  any  doubt  that  between  the 
eighth  century  and  the  thirteenth  numerous  Arabic  versions 
of  the  Scriptures  must  have  been  used  in  the  dift'erent  count- 
ries of  the  migthy  Mohammedan  Caliphate  3,  and  that  among 


1  The  first  Polj'glot  edited  by  Cardinal  Ximenez  in  1515  did  not 
comprise  the  Arabic  version;  neither  did  the  one  published  at  Antwerp 
in  1571,  the  so-called  "Regia".  The  Paris  Heptaglot  appearing  in  1645 
under  the  auspices  of  Mich,  i.e  Jay  contained  the  Old  and  the  Xew 
Testament  in  Arabic  edited  by  Gaurikl  Sio^ita  ,,from  au  Kgyptiau  original 
of  the  14th  century"  (Praef.  ad  Walt.  Polyglot,  p.  4).  What  authority 
attaches  to  this  statement,  it  is  difficult  to  say.  Generally,  however,  it 
is  admitted  that  the  Arabic  Pentateuch  of  this  Polyglot  is  substantially 
the  same  as  that  attributed  to  Saadias  Gaon,  a  native  of  El  Fayoum  in 
Egypt,  rector  of  the  Jewish  Academy  at  Sora,  Babylonia,  about  the  year 
930  A.  D.,  which  version  was  first  issued  in  print,  in  Hebrew  characters, 
in  the  so-called  Constantinopolitan  Polyglot  (i.  e.  the  Pentateuch  in 
Hebrew,  Chaldoe,  Persian  and  Arabic)  in  the  year  15  Ifj.—Tlie  other  books 
of  the  Paris'  Polyglot  are  translated  partly  from  the  Greek,  partly  from 
the  Syriac,  and  present  an  odd  medley  of  heterogeneous  versions  made 
at  different  times  by  different  authors  from  diverse  sources  (see  Roedigbk, 
De  Origine  et  Indole  Arabicae  Libr.  V.  T.  Historicorum  Interpretationis, 
cited  above).  Walton's  Polyglot  printed  at  Loudon  in  1057  contains  the 
Arabic  text  of  the  l^aris  Polyglot  with  emendations  and  additions  taken 
from  Bodleian  MSS.  (Praef.  ad  Walton,  I'olygl.  p.  5,  n.  16). 

2  The  pericopes  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  found  in  the  ancient 
liturgical  books  of  the  Oriental  Churches  that  now  use  Arabic  in  the 
liturgy  are  certainly  of  the  gi'eatest  importance  for  the  study  of  the 
early  Arabic  versions.  But  in  printed  editions  we  must  always  take  care 
to  determine  whether  we  really  have  an  old  text  before  us  or  some  later 
recension;  and  for  the  most  jiart  we  shall  also  have  to  draw  for  these 
liturgical  texts  on  manuscript  material. 

3  Perhaps  the  opinion  of  Doderlein  is  somewhat 'exaggerated  when 
he  applies  to  the  Arabic  versions  what  St.  Augustine  (Doctr.  christ.  II. 
11.  14.  15)  wrote  of  the  Latin  translations  of  the  Bible  at  his  time:  ''Qui 
Scripturas  ex  hebraca  lingua  in  graecam  verterunt,  numerari  possunt; 
latini  autem  intcrprotes  nullo  modo:  ut  cnim  cuivis  in  manus  venit  codex 
graecus  et  alinuantulum  facultatis  sibi  utriusque  linguae  habere  videbatur 
ausus  est  interpretari"  (Eichhorn's  Repertorium  II,  p.  151). 

Khodb,  Arabic  Pentateuch  in  tlie  Cliurcb  of  Egypt.  2 


1 8  Introduction 


these  there  are  some  that  are  not  only  venerable  for  anti- 
(juity,  but  also  consecrated  by  long  standing  use  in  the  Li- 
turgy. 

To  return  to  the  Church  of  Egypt ',  it  is  indeed  extremely 
diflBcult  to  fix  with  any  degree  of  certainty  the  time  when  the 
8acred  Scriptures  were  first  translated  into  the  idiom  of  the 
Arabic  conquerors.  Scholars  are  by  no  means  agreed  even  as 
to  the  exact  date  of  the  origin  of  the  Coptic  versions;  and  as 
the  MSS.  that  have  come  down  to  us  are  comparatively  few^ 
and  not  of  very  great  antiquity,  the  precise  facts  as  to  the 
beginnings  of  the  Coptic  version  will  perhaps  never  be  defin- 
itely ascertained.  From  the  time  of  St.  Mark,  Greek  had 
been  the  official  language  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria:  the 
Scriptures  and  the  Liturgy  were  writteu  in  Greek.  In  course 
of  time,  however,  these  sacred  books,  or  at  least  parts  of 
them,  were  translated  into  the  difierent  Coptic  dialects,  chieHy 
into  the  Sahidic  in  the  South  and  into  the  Bohairic  in  the 
Delta   region   and   in   the   desert   of  .Nitria.     But    instead  of 

•  For  information  on  the  origin  and  the  early  lU'voloimieut  of  the 
Cliureh  in  Egypt  see  the  article  on  the  Church  cf  Alesandria  (s.  v.  Ale- 
xandria) by  J.  K.  Woods  in  the  Catholic  Encyclopedia,  vol.  I,  pp.  300— .302; 
also  vol.  X,  pp.  1.57 — 161  (s.  v.  Melchites)  a  summary  of  the  History  of 
the  Melkite  Church  by  A.  Fortescoe;  and  for  the  Coptic  Church  the 
scholarly  treatise  on  Egypt  by  H.  Hvvernat  in  the  same  Encyclojiodia, 
vol.  V,  pp.  329-363,  especially  sect.  V  (pp.  350— 35ti)  The  Coptic  Church, 
sect.  VI  (i>p.  3.^^>— 362)  Coptic  Literature,  sect.  Vll  (p.  362— 363)  Copto- 
Arabic  Literature.  As  these  articles  show,  the  terms  "Copt"  and  "Coptic" 
are  used  by  some  to  designate  the  Monophysites  or  Jacobites  of  Egypt, 
by  others  as  an  equivalent  for  the  native  Egyptians  in  general  (as 
distinguished  from  the  Greek  and  Roman  colonists).  Although  the  latter 
use  is  etymologically  correct  (Copt=kibf  or  kubt  in  Arabic,  a  corruption 
and  adaptation  of  the  Cireek  AiyintTtoi),  we  shall  employ  the  term  in  its 
historical  more  restricted  sense  and  distinguish  consistently  two  branches 
of  the  "Church  of  Kgypt",  ^iz.  the  Melkites  and  the  Copts.  In  fact,  the' 
Jacobite  I'atriarch  (residing  in  Alexandria  and  later  in  Old  Cairo)  laid 
claim  to  jurisdiction  overall  the  -Coptic"  Christians  of  Egypt,  Abyssinia, 
Nubia  and  Barbary  (J.  M.  Woods,  1.  c.). 

2  See  the  interesting  article  by  H.  Htvermat:  "Pounjuoi  les  ancicnnes 
collections  de  manuscrits  Coptes  sont  si  pauvres",  Kevuc  Ijiblique  (N.  S. 
tome  X)  1913,  pp.  422—428. 


Jnlroihtcdon  19 


venturing  to  determine  the  century  when  the  different  versions 
originated  ',  it  is  no  doubt  better  to  adopt  the  jjrudent  reserve 
ot'H.  Htvernat  (in  his  article  cited  above,  p.  18,  n.  2)  and  be 
contented  for  the  time  being  witli  the  general  statements,  that 
the  translating  of  the  sacred  and  the  liturgical  books  into  the 
Coptic  dialects  took  place  gradually  in  the  first  centuries  of 
the  Christian  era  "according  to  the  needs  and  circumstances 
of  place  and  time",  and  that  the  Coptic  period  of  the  Litera- 
ture of  the  Church  of  Egypt  extends  from  about  the  sixth  or 
seventh  to  the  eleventh  or  twelfth  century  respectively. 

In  like  manner  we  consider  it  a  most  delicate  task  to 
say  with  any  degree  of  certainty,  precisely  when  the  Arabic 
versions  came  into  vogue  in  the  Church  of  Egypt.  The  sources 
from  which  to  derive  explicit  information  are  too  scarce, 
especially  since  the  MSS.  of  the  monasteries  and  churches  of 
Egypt  were  so  ill  preserved,  nay  even  suffered  to  go  to  ruin 
by  the  owners  with  unpardonable  neglect  2.  Evidently  there 
can  be  no  question  of  Egyptian  Arabic  versions  prior  to  the 
subjugation  of  the  country  by  the  followers  of  the  Prophet 
from  Arabic  in  the  seventh  century.  But  it  would  seem  not 
at  all  improbable  that  in  the  ninth  century,  perhaps  even  in 
the  eighth,  Arabic  versions  of  the  Scriptures,  at  least  ot  cer- 


1  J.  Leipoldt,  Geschichte  der  koptischen  Litteratur  (iu  Geschichte 
der  christlichen  Litteratureu  des  Orients,  II.  Auflage,  Leipzig  1909)  p.  139, 
assigns  the  Sahidio  version  to  the  third  or  fourth  century  and  the  Bo- 
hairic  to  the  sixth  or  seventh.  A.  J.  Maas  in  his  article  on  the  Versions 
(mentioned  above,  pag.  16)  writes  ol'  the  Coptic  versions  (first  section, 
n.  2):  "It  is  generally  admitted  that  some  of  the  versions,  if  not  all,  date 
back  to  the  second  century".  Compare  also  Etienne  QuAXKKMEnE,  Re- 
cherches  Criti(iues  ct  Historiques  sur  la  Langue  et  la  Litterature  de 
I'Egypte,  Paris  1808,  pp.  1 — 44;  and  H.  Hvvernat,  Etude  sur  les  versions 
coptes  de  la  Bible,  in  the  Revue  Biblique  (.July — October  1896  and  Jan. 
1897),  and  the  article  "Coptic  Versions  of  the  Bible"  by  the  same  author 
in  The  Catliolic  Encycl;  vol.  XVI,  pp.  78—80. 

2  See  H.  Hvveknat,  Fuurquoi  les  ancieunes  collections  etc.,  cited 
above,  p.  18,  n.  2.  We  think  we  are  justified  in  extending  to  other  MSS. 
of  the  monastery  and  church  libraries  what  the  author  asserts  explicitly 
with  regard  to  the  Coptic  BISS.  only. 

2* 


20  IiUroduction 


tain  books,  should  have  originated  in  Egypt,  though  the  question 
is  exceedingly  obscure  and  so  far  entirely  unsolved.  A  plaus- 
ible theory  for  its  solution  may  porhaps  be  derived  from  a 
careful  consideration  of  the  history  of  the  Church  of  Alex- 
andria and  of  the  "needs  and  circumstances  of  place  and  time" 
under  which  such  versions  must  have  come  into  use. ' 

Under  the  Patriarch  Dioscurus  (444—451)  the  Church  of 
Alexandria  became  unfortunately  embroiled  in  the  Monophysite 
heresy.  At  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (451)  Dioscurus  was 
deposed  and  banished;  but  the  newly  elected  orthodox  (Catholic) 
Patriarch  was  murdered  (in  457)  by  the  populace  and  an 
open  schism  ensued,  giving  rise  to  two  permanent  parties:  the 
orthodox  or  Catholic  party,  which  clung  to  the  Church  of 
Constantinople  in  their  religious  tenets  and  became  known 
eventually  as  ^lelkites  or  Royalists  (i.  e.  adherents  of  the 
Emperor)  because  they  remained  faithful  to  the  decisions  of 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  which  had  been  declared  by  Em- 
peror Marcian  the  law  the  Eiupire  (whence  also  "Chalce- 
donians")  and  the  Monophysitos  (or  Jacobites)  who  formed 
the  large  majority  of  the  native  population,  constituting  in 
fact  a  National  Church,  and  who,  therefore,  became  known 
after  the  Arab  invasion  simply  as  Kubt  (i.  e.  Egyptians)  or 
Copts.  Both  parties  used  the  same  Liturgy,  that  of  St.  Mark; 
but  the  contrast  betwesu  Monophysites  and  Melkites  was  ex- 
pressed in  their  language:  whereas  the  Monophysites  spoke 
the  national  language  of  the  country,  the  Coptic,  and  adopted 
it  in  the  Liturgy  (just  as  the  Monophysites  in  Syria  and 
Palestine  used  Syriac);  the  Melkites,  who  for  the  most  part 
were  foreigners,  settlers,  merchants  and  officials  sent  out  from 


'  Compare  the  articles  quoted  p.  18,  u.  1 ;  moreover:  Stanlev  Lane- 
Fools,  A  History  of  Egypt  in  tlie  Mi<ldli>  Ages,  London  lilOL  especially 
pp.  2—8,  27sqq.;  Fowlek,  Christian  Egypt,  London  1902;  Becker,  Bei- 
trage  zur  (ioschichte  .\gypten8  unter  dcm  Islam,  StralJliurg  1903;  Reite- 
HETER,  Beschreibung  Agyptens  in\  Mittelaltor,  Leipzig  1903;  Fit.  Kavseu 
und  E.  RoLOi'F,  Agyplen  einsl  und  jetzt,  Freiburg  1908  (especially 
pp.  196—198  and  292—314);  A.  Fortescue,  The  Lesser  Eastern  Churches, 
London  1913. 


Introduction  21 


Constantinople,   with   only  a  small  fraction  of  the  native  po- 
pulation, retained  the  Greek. 

When,  however,  in  the  seventh  century  the  Mohammedans 
had  made  themselves  masters  of  the  country,  the  relation  of 
the  Melkite  Church  of  Egypt  with  the  Church  of  the  Empire 
was  more  and  more  checked,  in  fact  paralyzed  and  hefore 
long  was  cempletely  severed,  whilst  the  language  of  the  con- 
querors (though  at  first  no  repressive  measures  had  been  used 
against  the  vernacular)  was  with  the  beginning  of  the  eighth 
century  forced  upon  the  subjugated  people  i.  Is  it  then  sur- 
prising, or  is  it  not  rather  a  natural  consequence,  that  the 
Melkite  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Egypt,  which  had  no  ver- 
nacular liturgical  language  to  form  a  barrier,  as  it  were,  against 
the  encroachments  of  the  new  idiom,  should  have  adopted  at 
an  early  date  the  language  of  every-day  life,  the  Arabic,  even 
in  the  Liturgy  P^ 

In  the  Jacobite  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Egypt,  however, 
matters  probably  took  a  somewhat  different  turn.  The  cry 
of  "the  faith  of  Cyril,  one  nature  in  Christ,  no  betrayal  of 
Ephesus"  really  meant  "no  submission  to  the  foreign  tyrant 
at  the  Bosporus".  And  hence  this  National  Church,  owing' 
to  its  animosity  towards  the  Church  of  the  Empire,  had  adopted 
as  its  liturgical  language  the  current  Egyptian  vernacular  long 
before  the  Arab  invasion,  earlier  most  likely  in  Upper  Egj'pt, 
where  the  Sahidic  was  the  principal  dialect,  but  also  in  Lower 
Egypt,  where  the  Bohairic  dialect  prevailed.  The  Copts  were 
at  first  favored  by  the  Arab  conquerors,  because  they  had 
been  the  abettors  and  auxiliaries  of  the  Mohammedans  against 
the  Graeco-Roman  domination,  and  their  national  language 
was  not  ostracized  from  public  documents  in  the  first  century 
after  the  invasion;   later,   however,   repressive  nLeasures  were 

'  Lane-Poole,  1.  c.  p.  27:  „Governor  Abdallab  (A.  D.  705)  ordered 
Arabic  to  be  used  in  all  public  documents,  instead  of  Coptic  as  here- 
tofore". 

2  Cyril  Charon,  Histoire  des  Patriarcata  Melkites,  Rome  1909,  tome 
III,  p.  137sqii. 


22  Introduction 

put  in  force.  Nevertheless  the  Coptic,  so  intimately  interwoven 
with  the  life  of  the  people,  continued  to  hold  its  own  for  a 
long  time,  especially  as  the  language  of  literature  and  of  the 
liturgy.  In  fact,  it  is  precisely  because  the  liturgical  language 
of  the  Coptic  Church  was  the  native  tongue  aud  for  a  long 
time  the  every-day  language  of  the  people '  (and  not  merely 
the  language  of  the  liturgy,  as  the  Greek  was  for  the  Egyptian 
Melkites)  that  in  the  Coptic  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Egypt 
the  Arabic  found  admission  into  the  liturgy  at  a  comparatively 
late  period,  probably  not  before  the  tenth  century,  and  then 
only  in  the  form  of  -lections"  or  readings  from  the  Old  and 
the  New  Testament. 

Yet  it  could  hardly  be  otherwise  than  tiiat  the  language 
of  the  conquerors,  the  Arabic,  owing  to  common  intercourse 
should  have  steadily  gained  ground  on  the  Coptic  in  every- 
day life;  and  especially  when,  from  the  eighth  century  onwards, 
the  Jacobites,  were  likewise  subjected  to  incessant  oppressions 
from  the  new  masters  and  the  Coptic  tongue  was  banned  from 
public  life  and  official  documents  ^  it  was  a  necessary  con- 
sequence that  before  long  the  people  understood  Arabic  better 
than  Coptic,  that  Arabic  became  the  universally  spoken  idiom, 
the  "new  vernacular",  and  tliat  the  "old  vernacular"  Coptic 
was  doomed  to  a  slow  but  certain  decline. 

As  a  result  Arabic  versions  of  the  Bible,  especially  of  the 
more  frequently  used  parts  of  the  same,  became  a  desideratum 
at  first  with  the  ordinary  classes  of  the  people  and  gradually 
with  the  higher  and  educated  classes  also.  And  this  is  the 
reason  why  we  deem  it  not  at  all  improbable  that  private  or 
unofficial  versions  of  portious  of  the  Sacred  Scripture  may 
have  begun  to  circulate  among  the  Copts  in  Egypt  from  the 
ninth  century  perhaps  a  hundred  years  or  more  before  they 
were  gi'anted  official  recognition  in  the  Liturgy  alongside  of 


■  All  the  more  so  since  the  Boliairic,  the  language  of  the  Jacobite 
Patriarch,  gradually  gained  predominance  over  the  .Sahidic  and  other 
dialects  and  became  practically  the  vernacular  of  all  the  Copts. 

2  Compare  above,  p.  21,  n.  1. 


Introduction '  23 


the  Coptic,  which  declined  more  and  more,  until  by  the  four- 
teenth or  fifteenth  century  it  was  reduced  to  a  merely  liturg- 
ical "dead"  language,  practically  unknown  even  to  the  cultured 
classes  of  the  Egyptians. 

Be  it  rememhered,  however,  that  all  this,  plausible  as  it 
may  appear,  is  only  a  theory,  —  an  attempt  at  a  satisfactory 
explanation  in  default  of  positive  arguments  that  could  settle 
the  question  definitely.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  real 
facts  as  to  the  use  of  Arabic  versions  of  the  Scriptures  in  the 
two  Branches  of  the  Church  of  Egypt,  —  if  the  facts  are 
ever  ascertained,  —  the  question  will  have  to  be  decided  from 
a  study  of  manuscript  sources:  manuscripts  of  th(^  Bible 
proper,  manuscripts  of  liturgical  books  with  their  numerous 
pericopes  of  Holy  Writ,  and  manuscripts  of  collections  of 
canons,  wherein  scriptural  passages  are  frequently  quoted.  Re- 
stricting ourselves,  then,  for  reasons  already  stated  to  the 
Pentateuch  only  (of  which  we  have,  moreover,  a  greater  number 
of  MSS.  than  of  any  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  ex- 
cepting, perhaps,  the  Psalms)  we  shall  endeavor  in  this  disser- 
tation to  put  before  the  reader  the  general  results  of  our 
study  of  a  large  number  of  representative  Egyptian  Mss.  of 
the  Arabic  Pentateuch,  without,  however,  entering  for  the  pre- 
sent into  a  detailed  discussion  of  all  the  obscure  and  inter- 
esting questions  referred  to  above  as  to  the  age,  the  origin, 
the  nature  and  the  mutual  relation  of  the  Araliic  Versions 
of  the  Pentateucii  in  the  Church  of  Egypt. 


PART  I 

DESCRIPTION  AND  COMPARATIVE  STUDY 

OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS 


CHAPTER  I 

GENERAL  NOTICE  ON  THE  MANUSCRIPTS 
OP  THE  ARABIC  TENTATEUCH 

A.  Wlieii  there  is  question  of  fiuding  Arabic  manuscripts 
of  Egyptian  origin,  we  naturally  first  turn  to  those  MSS.  which 
contain  an  Arabic  and  a  Coptic  text  arranged  in  parallel 
columns  on  the  same  page,  or  in  which  there  is  sometimes  an 
Arabic  text  written  in  miniature  characters  on  the  margin 
beside  the  Coptic  text.  As  Coptic  was  never  used  outside  of 
Egyi)t,  the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  aforesaid  iMSS.  in  practically 
establislied  beyond  doubt. 

Of  these  bilingual  MSS.  we  have  found  nine  that  contain 
the  Pentateuch,  in  whole  or  in  part,  and  we  have  arranged 
them  according  to  their  age  as  indicated  in  tlie  catalogues. 
The  date  of  the  MSS.  refers  directly  to  the  Coptic  text  only, 
as  in  at  least  one  instance  (Vatic.  Copt.  1),  the  Arabic  text 
was  evidently  added  later.  , 

1)  Vatic.  Copt.  1,  10th  cent.  (Pent.)  Mai",  Script.  Vet.  V, 
part.  2,  p.  114. 

2)  Vatic.  Copt.  2—4,  14th  cent.  (Pent.)  2  Mai,  Script.  Vet.  V, 
part.  2,  p.  115—117. 

3)  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1,  1300  (Pent.)  Chabot^,  Invent.,  p.  6. 

4)  Brit.  Mus.  or.  422,  1393  (Pent.)  Ckum^,  Cat.  B.  M.  p.  315, 
n.  712. 


1  Scriptorum  Veterum  Nova  Collectio  e  Vaticanis  Codieibus.    Edita 
ab  Ahqelo  Majo.   Romae  1831.    Tom  V,  part.  2.    See  below,  chap.  II,  1. 

2  See  below,  chap.  II,  2. 

3  J.  B.  Chabot,   Inventaire  Somraaire   des   Manuscrits  Copies  do  la 
Bibliothique  Nationale.     Paris  1906.     See  below,  Obap.  II,  3. 

■'  W.  B.  (Jrum,  Catalogue  of  the  Coptic  MSS.  in  the  British  Museum. 
London  1905.    See  below,  chap.  II,  5. 


28        General  notice  on  the  Mamtscripts  of  the  Arabic  Pentateuch 

6)  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  33,  1674  (Pent.)  Ubi«,  Copt.  1,  p.  318. 

6)  B.  2s.  Paris.  Copt.  '^7  1676  (Gen.,  Exod.)  Chabot,  In- 
vent., p.  13. 

7)  Bibl.  Angelica,  Rome,  Copt.  4,  date?  (Genesis)  Guidi^ 
Cataloghi,  p.  78. 

8)  Leyden  Ci>d.  1507,  17r)8  (Levit.)  de  Goe-ie^,  Cat  V., 
p.  77,  n.  2366. 

9)  B. N.Paris.  Copt.  100,  1835 (Pent.)  Chabot,  Invent, p.  16. 
The  Coptic  in  these  MSS.  is  in  the  Bohairic  dialect;  for, 

by  the  time  that  Arabic  was  so  much  in  vogue  that  these 
bilingual  MSS.  l)ecame  a  necessity  for  divine  service,  as  ex- 
plained above,  the  Bohairic  had  replaced  nearly  all  other 
Egyptian  dialects  and  was  practically  the  vernacular,  and  cer- 
tainly the  liturgical  language,  of  all  the  Copts. 

Of  the  Arabic  text  of  these  double  ]\ISS.  nothing  has  ever 
been  published.     As  to  the  Coptic  <: 

a)  The  text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt  33  was  edited  by 
David  Wii.kins  in  his  "Coptic  Pentateuch",  Loudon  1731. 

b)  MS.  Brit.  Mus.  or.  422  (Tattam)  was  utilized  (besides 
the  edition  of  Wilkiks)  l)y  Paul  de  Lacjarde,  "Der 
Pentateuch  Kojjtisch",  Leipzig  1867. 

c)  The  throe  MSS.  (1,  57,  100)  of  the  Paris  Natiiuial 
Library  were  probably  all  used  by  Pallet  "La  version 
Cophte  du  Peutateuque",  Paris  1854;  but  as  he  pub- 
lished only  the  first  27  chapters  of  Genesis  without  any 
introduction  or  even  a  key  to  the  abl)reviation  marks 
he  employed,  his  edition  is  practically  useless. 


'  J.  Uri,  Bililiotbecae  BotUeiaime  Oodicum  Mauuscriptorum  Orieii- 
talium  Catalogus.     I'ars  I'rima.     (>.\ouii  1787.     See  below,  chaji.  II,  4. 

2  I.  GuiDi,  C'ataloghi  dei  Codici  Orieiitali  dei  alcuue  BibliotecLe 
d'ltalia.  Firenze  1878.  The  MS.  here  mentioned  couUins  47  chapters 
in  Coptic,  and  7  chapters  only  in  Arabic. 

3  M.  J.  DE  GoEjE,  Catalogus  Codicum  Orientalium  Bibliothecae  Aca- 
demiac  Lugduuo-Batarae,  vol.  V.     Lugduno-Batavoruiii  1893. 

*  Cfr.  JI.  IIyvernat,  Etude  sur  lus  Versions  Copies  de  la  Bible  (Ex- 
trait  de  la  Revue  Bibhque,  July,  Oct.  1896,  Jan.  1897),  p.  38sqq. 


Part  I,  Chap.  I  29 


Briefly,  then,  we  may  say  that  the  Copto- Arabic  MSS.  of 
the  Pentateuch  have  not  been  utilized  for  publication,  except 
Hunt.  33  and  Brit.  Mus.  or.  422  with  regard  to  the  Coptic 
text  only. 

B.  Passing  from  these  bilingual  MSS.  to  those  that  contain 
merely  the  Arabic  text,  the  question  of  determining  their 
Egyptian  origin  becomes  far  more  difficult,  the  reason  being 
that  statements  or  notes  concerning  origin  ("i)rovenance")  arc, 
on  the  whole,  but  rarely  found  in  these  MSS.;  and  where  an 
attempt  at  "placing"  a  MS.  is  made  by  the  cataloguer,  the 
indication  is,  as  our  own  experience  has  proved,  not  unfre- 
quently  misleading.  We  do  not  presume,  therefore,  to  give  a 
list  of  Egyptian  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch;  we  do  not 
even  wish  to  classify  as  Egyptian  all  the  MSS.  which,  guided 
by  the  sparse  notes  of  the  catalogues  and  occasional  remarks 
of  different  writers,  we  have  selected  for  our  study  on  the 
Arabic  Versions  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Churcli  of  Egypt; 
we  refer  the  reader  instead  to  the  following  chapters,  where- 
in the  nature  and  probable  origin  of  each  of  these  MSS.  is 
fully  discussed. 

Nevertheless  it  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  give  a  fairly 
complete  list  of  the  more  important  MSS.  of  the  Arabic  Pen- 
tateuch in  general,  as  they  are  found  in  tiie  different  libraries 
of  Europe',  and  to  indicate  briefly  on  the  authority  of  the 
catalogues  which  we  consulted  for  this  compilation,  their 
pi'obable  age  and  the  original  which  the  version  represents. 
We  shall  also  indicate,  to  the  best  of  our  knowledge,  when 
and  by  whom  any  of  these  MSS.  have  been  utilized  for 
publication. 


1  A.  catalogue  of  the  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  .Jesuit  University  at  Beyrout, 
Syria,  appeared  in  the  Al-Machriq  (Revue  catholique  orientale  bimensuelle, 
Beyrouth),  vol.  VII,  1904.  On  pp.  3:5— ;»8  there  is  described  a  manuscript 
(MS.  1)  dated  1690  and  certaiuing  the  greater  part  of  the  O.  T.  The 
Pentateuch,  of  which  some  specimens  are  given,  extends  from  page  1 
to  2;J1. 


30 


Gentral  nolitr  nu  the  Manusrriptx  of  the  Arahic  Fentateuch 


a)  In  the  Florentine  Library'. 

Cod.  Palat.  orient.  VII,      Genesis  and  Exodus,  Peshitto  — 

Cod.  Palat.  orient  XII,      Pentateuch  Hebrew 

Cod.  Palat.  orient.  XV,      Genesis  Septuag.  — 

Cod.  Palat  orient.  XXI  •■'.Pentateuch  Peshitto  1245 

b)  In  the  Vatican  Library  s. 

Vat.  Ar.  1  Pentateuch  Syriac,  Septuag.    1329 

Vat.  Ar.  II  Pentateuch  Septuagint^  14th  cent 

VatAr.  CDLXV  Pentateuch  (Maronite)  17  th  cent 

Vat  Ar.  CDLX VIII  Old  Test.  (Mekhite)  1579 

VatAr.  DXXV  Pentateuch  —  17  th  cent 

Vat.  Ar.  DCV  Pentateuch  Syriac  1464 

Vat  Aa-.  DC VI  Pentateudi  (Coptic)  1344 

c)  In  the  Royal  Library  at  Berlin  ^ 
Xo.  10172  Pentateuch  Syriac  (?)  1280 

d)  In  the  Imperial  Library  at  Vienna  o. 
Xo.  1.541  Pentateuch  Hebrew  — 

e)  In  the  Royal  State  Library  at  Munich'. 
Cod.  ar.  234  (or.  40)         Pentateuch         Syriac  (?)  1492 

Cod.  ar.  233  (or.  34)        Genesis  Hebrew  16th  cent. 


'  Steph.  Evod.  AssEM.\m:s,  Bibliothecae  Laurentianae  et  Palatinae 
Codicum  MSS.  Orientalium  "Catalogus.     Florentiuae  1747. 

2  First  four  chapters  of  Genesis  pul)lished  liy  P.  Kahlk.  Die  ara- 
bischen  Bibelubersetzungen  V,  p.  13—23.     See  below,  chap.  V,  1.  - 

'  Script.  Vet.  nova  Collectio  e  Vaticanis  Codicibus  edita  ab  Anqelo 
Mud.     Romae  1831.     Tom.  IV.  part.  2. 

'■  See  below,  chap.  V,  1. 

■■•  W.  Ahlwarut,  Verzeichiiis  der  arab.  HSS.  der  ki'inigl.  Bibliothek 
in  Berlin,  10  vols..  Berlin  18«7— 1899.  vol    IX. 

6  G.  Flugel,  Die  Araliischen,  I'ersischen  und  Tiirkischeii  Hand- 
schriften  der  Koniglichen  Hofbibliothek  zu  Wien.  3  vols.  Wien  1867, 
vol.  III. 

'  Joseph  Aojieb,  Die  arabischen  Hdss.  der  K.  Hof-  und  Staatsbiblio- 
thek  in  Munchen.  Miinchea  18»j(i.  See  also  Orai-,  C'hristlii-h-arabische 
Literatur,  p.  25, 


rarl  I,  Cluip.  1  31 

t)  In  the  Library  of  the  Leyden  Academy '. 

Cod.  236  Scaliger  (n.  2361)'  Hebrew  — 

Cod.  215  Scaliger  (n.  2362)  Hebrew(?)  —    . 

Cod.  1222  Schultens.  (n.  2363)3  Samaritan  — 

Cod.  230  Scaliger  (n.  2364)  ^  (Carshunic)  1.528 

Cod.  377  Warner  (n.  2365)^  Hebrew-Syriac  1240 

g)  In  the  British  Museum 's. 

7204  Rich  Pentateuch  "Catena"  (Carshunic)       - 

Harl.  .^475  (I)  Pentateuch  —  Uthcent. 

Harl.  5506  (II)  Genesis  Hebrew       17  th  cent. 

Add.ll855(XVl[I)  Pentateuch  Hebrew(?)  13thcent. 

h)  In  the  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford  '. 

Hunt.  84  (IJri,  Syr.  XXVII)  Pentateuch  "Catena"  Carsh.  — 
Marsh  175  (Uri,  Syr.  XXIX)  Pentateuch  "Catena"  Carsh.  — 
Bodl.Arch.D.51  (Dri, Syr. XXVIII)  Pent. "Catena"  Carsh 8.  — 
Hunt.  112  (Uri,  Syr.  XXX)  Gen.,  Exod.,  Levit.,  "Cat."  Carsh  s.  — 
Marsh.  440  (Uri,  Syr.  XXVI)  9  Gen.,  Exod.,  "Catena"  Carsh  8.  _ 
Pocock.  348  (Uri,  Hebr.  XIII)  Gen.,  Exod.,  Hebrew  — 
Pocock.  396  (Uri,  Hebr.  XIV)  Levit,  Numb,  Deut.,  Hebrew  — 


'  M.  J.  DE  GoEjE,  Catalog.  Cod.  Orient.  V,  cited  above. 

-  Published  by  Erpenids,  Pentateiichus   Mosis   arabice,  Leiden   1622. 

3  Published  by  AuR.  Kuenen,  Arabica  versio  Peutateuchi  Samaritan;i. 
I.eiden  18.54. 

*  Genesis  only  published  by  De  Lagakde,  "Materialien  zur  Geschichtc 
und  Kritik  des  Pentateuehs  II",  Leipzig  1867. 

5  Published  by  De  Laoarde,  "Materialien  zur  Geschichte  und  Kritik 
des  Pentateuehs  I",  Leipzig  1867. 

8  GuL.  Cureton,  Catalogus  Codicum  Manuscriptorum  Orientaliuui 
ipiae  in  Museo  Britannieo  asservantur.  Pars  prima  codiees  Syriacos  et 
Carshunicos  eoniplectens.  Pars  secunda  codices  Arabicos  complectens. 
Londiiii  184(5. 

'  L'ri's  Catalogue  cited  above.  Als,o  the  continuation  of  the  same  in 
two  volumes:  Partis  secundae  volunien  primum  cont'ocit  Ai.ex.  Nicoll, 
Oxonii  1821.  Partis  secundae  volunien  secundum  cdidit  E.  B.  Posey, 
Oxonii  1835. 

8  See  Pdsev,  p.  444.  9  See  below,  chap.  IV,  3. 


."^2        Oentral  notice  on  Uie  Jleuiuscripts  of  the  Arabic  Pnifnteurh 

Hunt.  52.?  (Uri.  Hebr.  XLVI)  Pentateuch  Hel)iew  1317 
Hunt.  460  (Uri.  Hebr.  L)  Pentateuch         Hebrew  — 

Lauil.  or.  272  (Uri,  Ar.  Christ.  I)  Pent.  Hebrew-Samar. '  1347 
Laud.  or.  243  (Uri,  Ar.  Christ.  11)2  Pent.  Septuag.  — 
Laud.  or.  258  (Uri,  Ar.  Christ.  Ill) «  Pent.  Sei)tuag.  — 
Pocuck.21!>(Uri.Ar. Christ.  IV)  *  Pent.  Syriac?  (Pusey,  p.  444)  — 
Seld.  66  (Uri.  Ar.  Christ.  VII)  Pent.  Peshitto  (Pusey.  p.  444)  — 
Hunt.424(Uri,Ar.Christ.VIII)*Pent.Hebre\v(Pusey,l.c.,Syr.)  — 
Hunt.  186  (Uri,  Ar.  Christ.  IX)  Pent.  —  (Pusey. I.e., Syr.)  — 
Bodl.  345  (NicoU.  p.  1)  Pent.  Samarit.  1480 

Bodl.  296  (Nicoll,  p.  10)  Pent.  '  —  1344 

Bodl.  324  (Pusey,  p.  444)  fi       Pent.  "Catena"        (Carsh.)  1579- 

i)  In  the  National  Library  at  Paris '. 
B.  N.  ar.  1  (Anc.  fonds  !)«      Old  Test.  Hebr.  (Pent.)  1583 

B.  X.  ar.  4  (Anc.  fonds  3)»      Pent         Samarit.(?)  13th  cent. 

B.  N.  ar.  5  (Anc.  fonds  2) '"  Pent.  Samar.-Syr.  15th  cent. 
B.  N.  ar.  6  (Anc.  fonds  4) '»    Pent.         Samarit.  1432 

B.N.ar.  8  (Anc. fonds  12)1"  Pgnt.  Samarit.  16th  cent. 
B.  X.  ar.  9  (Supplement  3) ' '  Pent.         Septuag.  1283 


'  Cited  by  Holmes  and  Parsons  "Vetus  Test,  Graecum"  in  the  vari- 
ants to  the  Pentateuch  as  Arab.  3.     See  below,  chapt.  IV,  1. 

2  Cited  by  Holmes  and  Paf.so.ns  "Vet.  Test.  Graec."  as  Arab.  1;  also 
by  Fr.  Field  '-Origenis  Hexaploruni  quae  supersunt",  Oxouii  1875,  as 
Arab.  1. 

3  Cited  by  Holmes  and  Parsons  as  Arab.  2;  also  by  Field. 
*  See  below,  chap.  IV,  2. 

5  Cited  by  Holmes  and  Parsons  as  Arab.  4.   See  below,  chap.  IV,  4. 

6  See  below,  chap.  IV,  2. 

'  M.  DE  Slane,  Catalogue  des  manuscrits  arabes  de  la  Bibliothdque 
Xationale.  I'aris  1883 — 1887.  And:  H.  Zoxesberg,  Catalogue  des  manu- 
scrits syriaques  et  sabeeus  de  la  Bibliotheijue  Nationale,    Paris  1874. 

8  Pentateuch  said  to  be  the  version  of  Saadias.  Published  in  the 
Paris  (and  London)  Polyglot, 

3  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  2.     Also  App.  II. 

'"  Described  and  numerous  specimens  thereof  published  by  de  Sacv, 
in  his  famous  'Memoire"  on  the  Samaritan-Arabic  version  cited  above. 

<•  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  3. 


Fart  I,  Chap.  I  33 

B.N.ar.  10  (Supplement  5)'   Pent.  Septuag.  1330 

B.N.ar.  11  (Supplement  4)^  Pent.  Septuag.  1331 

B.  N.  ar.  12  (Suppl.  3   bis)  3    Pent.  Septuag.  1353 

B.  N.  ar.  13  (Anc.  fonds  10)     Pent.  Septuag.  15th  cent. 

B.  N.  ar.  14  (Aiic.  fonds    .5)     Pent.  Septuag.  16  th  cent. 

B.  N.  ar.  15  (Anc.  fonds  11)    Pent.  Septuag.  11  th  cent. 

B.N.ar.  16  (Anc.fonds5A)^  Pent.  —  1238 

B.N.ar.  17  (Anc.  fonds    6)     Pent.  Peshitto  1661 

B.  N.  ar.  18  (Anc.  fonds    7) -'Genesis     Peshitto  (?)  — 

B.  N.  ar.  21  (Suppl.  6)  Genesis  "Catena"'  Peshitto(?)  1597 

B.N.  syr.lO  (Anc.  fonds  4)  Gen.,  Exod.  "Catena"  Peshitto      — 

We  have  omitted  from  our  list  a  number  of  MSS.  which 
are  merely  modern  copies  —  made,  as  a  rule,  by  European 
writers  —  of  older  MSS.  Wliile  it  may  be  that  some  MSS. 
have  escaped  our  notice,  we  believe  tliat,  speaking  generally, 
the  foregoing  list  is  a  fairly  complete  one  of  the  more  im- 
portant Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch  preserved  in  the  dif- 
ferent libraries  of  Europe. 


'  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  4. 

2  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  6. 

'  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  1.    Also  App,  1. 

*  See  below,  cliap.  Ill,  2. 

'•>  See  below,  chap.  Ill,  fi. 


RuODB,  Arabic  Peotateuob  in  the  Churcti  of  Egypt 


CHAPTER  11 

THE 
COPTO-ARABIC    MSS.    OF    THE    PENTATEUCH 

From  the  large  number  of  Arabic  and  Copto-Arabic  MSS. 
listed  in  the  precgding  chapter,  eighteen  were  selected  for 
the  purpose  of  the  present  study,  five  of  them  belonging  to 
the  bilingual  MSS.  We  secured  photographs  of  the  Book  of 
Genesis,  in  whole  or  in  part,  and  of  some  other  portions  of 
the  Pentateuch  from  the  following  fourteen  MSS.: 

Vatic  Libr.  Copt.  1 

Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  2—4 

Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2 

B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1 

B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  9      * 

B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  10 

B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12 

British  Museum  or.  422 

Bodl  Libr.  Hunt.  33 

Bodl.  Libr.  Bodl  324 

Bodl.  Libr.  Marsh.  440 

Bodl.  Libr.  Pocock.  219 

Bodl.  Libr.  Land.  or.  272 

Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424 
We  have  been  enabled,  moreover,  through  a  number   of 
selected   notes    generously   placed    at   our   disposal   by   Prof. 
H.  Hvverxat',   to    control   the  text   of  MSS.  Ar.  4,  Ar.  11. 
Ar.  16,  Ar.  18  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris. 


'  Tlipse  notes  were  taken  by  Prof.  H.  Httkbnat  during  bis  stay  at 
Paris  in  the  autumn  of  1911.  We  are  indebted  to  them  for  much  of  our 
material  on  the  Manuscripts  of  the  Bibliotbdque  Nationale. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  35 


And  further  we  have  compared  the  pertinent  texts  found 
in  the  liturgical  books  of  the  Coptic  Church  edited  by  Tuki 
and  in  Hokner's  "Consecration  of  Church  and  Altar  —  Coptic 
Eite",  as  well  as  the  extracts  given  by  P.  Kahle  in  "Die 
arabiscben  Bibeliibersetzungen",  and  for  some  places  the  version 
in  Walton's  Polyglot. 

Before  entering  into  details  it  may  be  well  to  give,  in 
alphabetical  order,  a  list  of  abbreviations  used  in  this  study, 
especially  in  the  text  edition  which  forms  the  second  part  of 
our  work. 

A  =  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  1 
B  =  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  2-4 
C  =  B.  JSf.  Paris.  Copt.  1 
D  =  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt,  33 
E  =  Bodl.  Libr.  Laud.  or.  272 
F  =  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12 
G  =  British  Museum  or.  422 
H  =  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  16 
K  =  Bodl.  Libr.  Pocock  219 
L  =  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  9 
M  =  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  10 
N  =  Bodl.  Libr.  Marsh.  440 
O  =  B.  N.  Paris,  Ar.  1 1 
P  =B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  18 

R  ==  Text  found  in  Horner's  "Consecr.  of  Church  and  Altar" 
S  =  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2 

T  =  Text  found  in  the  liturgical  books  edited  by  Tuki 
V  =  Text  found  in  P.  Kahle  "Die  arab.  Bibeliibersetzungen" 
W  =  Text  in  Walton's  Polyglot 
X=Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424 
Z  =  The  second  Araluc  text  found  on  MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1  (C). 


The  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  treated  in  this  study  are  those 
designated  by  A,  B,  C,  D,  G.  We  shall  now  proceed  to 
describe  them  singly  and  in  detail. 

A* 


36  The  Coplo-Arabic  MSS.  of  tJu  PentaUuch 

1)  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt  1  =  A. 

This  MS.  compi-ises  i27B  folios,  written  ou  parchment,  and 
contains  the  Pentateuch  in  Coptic  and  Arabic.  It  is  evident, 
however,  from  the  aiTangoment  of  the  text  that  the  MS.  was 
intended  originally  for  the  Coptic  text  only,  the  first  writer 
having  left  but  a  comparatively  narrow  vacant  space  both  on 
the  outer  and  the  inner  margin. 

The  pages  are  numbered  with  Coptic  numerals;  the  first 
and  last  page  of  each  quire  bear  on  the  upper  margin  an 
ornament  in  the  form  of  a  cross  or  rosace  flanked  with  the 
usual  ejaculatories  iTu;  (Jesus I),  n\o  (O  ChristI).  A  later 
hand  added  on  top  of  the  recto  the  number  of  the  folio  in 
European  ciphers. 

Arabic  variants  and  notes  are  written  in  both  margins  and 
sometimes  over  the  Coptic  text.  In  several  instances  (v.  g. 
fol.  6',  Gen.  5,3.  6.  11)  it  seems  that  a  few  words  of  the  text 
were  erased  and  another  reading  was  written  above  them. 

We  are  not  directly  concerned  here  with  the  Coptic  text; 
but  we  may  remark  in  passing  that  our  own  investigation 
confirms  on  the  whole  the  statement  of  Assesiani  (Script.  Vet. 
Nova  Coll.,  V,  part.  2,  p.  114)  that  the  Coptic  is  an  accurate 
translation  from  the  Septuagint,  and  follows,  as  we  believe,  the 
Codex  Alexandrinus  in  differential  readings  (v.  g.  Gen.  5n,  12. 13). 
The  MS.  dates  back  to  the  tenth  or  even  to  the  ninth  century  >; 
fol.  1  and  fol.  4,  however,  have  been  added  by  a  later  hand, 
perhaps  in  the  twelfth  or  thirteenth  century.  The  ■^ame  later 
scribe  seems  to  have  written  (with  red  ink)  the  Coptic  numerals 
in  the  margin  close  to  the  Coptic  text,  sometimes  in  the  large 
initial  letters,  to  indicate,*  for  each  book  severally,  the  number 
of  the  sections  —  J^-«",  (▼•  g-  fol-  1*^,  fol.  6»  (^.  fol.  15 »  ig, 
fol.  23*  KK,  fol.  61*  fjA).  These  sections,  however,  are  not  of 
Coptic  ojigin,  but  were  probably  taken  over  from  some  other 
version  (possibly  Saadias'  Arabic  version);  for  the  division  of 


«  See   H.   Hyverhat,   Album   de    Paleographie   Copte,    Paris    1888, 
PL  5,  11,  18. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  37 


the  Sacred  Text  into  long  paragraphs  or  chapters  was  not 
known,  as  far  as  we  can  trace  it  from  other  MSS..  in  the 
Coptic  Church.  Certain  it  is  that  the  repairer  of  the  MS., 
besides  restoring  fol.  1  and  fol.  4,  also  corrected,  or  rather 
supplied  omis.sions  in,  the  Coptic  text',  as  may  be  seen  fol.  24*' 
(Gen.  22,  7)  and  fol.  25^  (Gen.  22, 17).  In  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers  and  Deuteronomy  the  so-called  Jly>l  or  (JS,  i.  e.  the 
words  of  God  addressed  to  Moses  or  to  the  Israelites,  are 
counted  up  —  for  all  five  books  continuously  —  with  Coptic 
numerals,  in  black  ink,  put  in  the  margin,  and  this  by  the 
original  scribe. 

That  the  Arabic  text  was  added  at  a  later  period,  there 
cannot  be  any  doubt.  It  has  been  literally  jammed  into  the 
narrow  outer  margin,  which  was  never  intended  for  it;  and 
it  speaks  well  for  the  calligraphic  abilities  of  the  scribe,  that 
he  succeeded  in  bringing  the  Arabic  corresponding  to  a  complete 
page  of  the  Coptic  text  into  the  limited  space  left  at  his 
disposal.  In  a  few  instances  only,  especially  towards  the  end 
of  Deuteronomy,  had  he  to  make  use  of  the  lower  margin 
also.  As  the  Arabic  text  throughout  is  written  by  the  same 
hand,  it  must  have  been  added  after  the  missing  leaves  of  the 
original  Coptic  MS.  had  been  replaced  by  new  ones.  Moreover, 
as  the  repairer,  we  presume,  had  cut  away  the  lacerated  outer 
margin  of  fol.  187  and  fol.  224;  the  scribe  had  exceptionally 
to  put  the  Arabic  text  on  the  inner  margin.  For  no  apparent 
reason  he  did  the  same  on  fol.  275,  whilst  on  fol.  157  '  he  had 


1  The  Coptic  text  of  this  MS.  has  not  yet  been  utilized  for  publication. 
David  Wilkins  claimed  to  have  used  for  his  edition  of  the  Coptic  Penta- 
teuch (London  1731)  a  Vatican  (and  a  I'aris)  MS.  among  others.  But 
this  was  called  into  doubt  by  Woide  in  the  preface  to  the  Pentateuch 
in  Holmes  and  Parsons's  Vetus  Testamentum  Graecum  (fol.  k  4):  "credi- 
bile  vidotur  Wilkensium  textum  Cod.  Hunt.  33  ploi  umque  typis  expressisse"; 
and  it  has  been  definitely  disproved  by  De  Laoarde  in  the  introduction 
to  his  own  edition  of  the  Coptic  Pentateuch  (Leipzig  18b7).  "Le  manuscrit 
1  du  Vatican,  le  plus  ancien  et  sans  doute  le  plus  correct  des  six(?) 
manuscrits  connus  n'a  done  pas  encore  fete  utilise"  (Hyvernat,  Etude 
sur  les  Vers.  Copt.  p.  39). 


38  The  Copto-Arahic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

to  continue  on  the  inner  margin  from  the  middle  of  the  page, 
because  the  lower  half  of  the  outer  margin  had  already  been 
utilized  for  some  remarks  in  Coptic. 

We  find  no  clue  to  determine  the  precise  date  when  the 
Arabic  text  was  put  on  our  MS.  But  to  judge  from  the  writ- 
ing by  the  plates  in  the  Arabic  Paleograpiiy  by  B.  Morit>:. 
Cairo  and  Leipzig  lHOo  (PI.  125—140)  we  should  say  that  the 
approximate  age  is  from  the  eleventh  to  the  thirteenth  century '. 
Tliis  opinion  is  corroborated  by  MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12,  which 
bears  the  date  1353  and  seems  to  have  been  copied  from  MS. 
Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  1  (see  below,  cliap.  Ill,  1). 

Fol.  l"   we   read  the  introductory  phrase:    ^U.1  <>^lj— >o 

J.^JJ\    «lJ^Xi>    J;M\   y 1\    J^l    ,_5~:yc    »Uy     tJO    J1.UJ1     J^\ 

J^V\.  The  sections  in  the  Arabic  text  corresponding  to  those 
marked  aside  of  the  Coptic  are  indicated  by  completely  written 
numerals;  v.  g.  fol.  10»  e--UJ>  J-oiJ\,  fol.  22"  s^\ji\  J-oiJ\ 
^^^j-ioJ\^  etc.  The  same  band  that  wrote  the  Arabic  version 
very  likely  wrote  these  numerals  also,  but  only  after  completing 
the  text  proper.  The  cud  of  a  section  (J-ai)  had  been  indi- 
cated at  first  by  a  little  black  circle  which  was  redrawn  later 
with  red  ink.  But  for  numerals  in  the  form  of  head-lines  the 
scribe  had  left  absolutely  no  space  at  first;  hence  he  was 
forced  to  crowd  them  between  the  lines  in  minute  characters 
and  this  at  times  makes  them  almost  illegible.  One  or  the 
other  is  not  marked,  v.  g.  the  32 d  section,  chap.  26,1  (fol.  SO*"); 
and  the  8  th  section  (fol.  7")  is  marked  at  chap.  6,8  instead 
of  6,9.  The  Coptic  numeral  (il)  stands  aside  of  the  Coptic 
text  in  a  line  which  contains  the  beginnings  of  both  verse  8 
and  verse  9.  But  at  verse  9  (hai)  a  little  slanting  line  is 
placed  to  show  the  real  beginning  of  section  8.  The  Arabic 
scribe  did  not  take  note  of  this,  and  so  he  placed  the  mark 
indicating  the  new  section  at  the  beginning  of  tlie  8th  verse 


I  We  refer  also   to:  Specimina  Codicum  Orieutalium  conlegit  Edob- 
Nius  TissERAST.    Boiinae  1914.    Compare  PI.  62»,  56'— 58. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  39 


in  his  Arabic  text'.  This  points  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
repairer  of  the  Coptic  MS.  and  the  writer  of  the  Arabic  text 
cannot  be  one  and  the  same  person. 

Genesis  ends  fol.  65*;  the  Coptic  colophon  on  the  following 
page  tells  us  that  there  are  4500  stichi^  in  this  book: 

I'GIIOOK;    (511    Oipilllll    Allllll    CTOIVOC   A(|>. 

Fol.  6G°-  shows  a  full-page  picture  of  the  Madonna  with 
the  Infant;  on  the  verso  Exodus  begins  with  the  invocation 
of  the  name  and  the  help  of  God,  a  common  practice  which 
is  observed  in  the  remaining  tlfi-ee  books  also. 

The  text  of  Exodus  is  interrupted  by  a  beautiful  pen- 
drawing3  which  represents  Moses  the  Prophet  and  covers  the 
whole  page  fol.  97 ^  The  nineteenth  J-os  (i.  e.  the  twenty- 
fifth  chapter)  begins  on  the  next  folio  under  the  heading:  imne 
riou)^  iiicKTiiii,  "de  dispositione  Tabernaculi".  Exodus 
concludes  on  fol.  121-^:  ecoAOt;  eii  uipiiiiii  tiokuj  aiiiiii 
GTOiA'oc  rX"  (3600  stichi);  above  the  transverse  bar  of  a 
pretty  plaited  cross  is  written  ic  vc  iiika,  and  below  tnc. 
nxc  Aqo-|>o. 

Leviticus  containing  2700  stichi  runs  from  fol.  121''  to  166", 
where  we  read:  agtitikoii  eii  oipiiiiii  tojkcju  auiiii  ctolyo<' 
B'h.  There  follows  a  beautifully  written  colophon-'  containing 
chiefly  a  petition  to  pray  for  the  writer  who  calls  himself 
Salomon  Babylon,  without,  however,  adding  any  further  details 
to  satisfy  our  curiosity  about  his  person.  It  should  be  observed 
that  Lev.  23, 20*  (of  the  Septuagint)  is  lacking  both  in  the 
Coptic  and  in  the  Arabic. 


'  We  adopted  the  suggestion  as  to  the  right  place  of  this  section 
from  MS.  Vatic.  Ar.  2,  where  we  find  the  same  divisions  as  in  our  MS. 

2  On  the  stichi  and  other  text  divisions  see  H.  B.  Swete,  An  Intro- 
duction to  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek,  Cambridge  1902,  pp.  341—361. 
For  eajiitulation  and  stichometry  of  the  Coptic  versions  compare  also 
David  Wilkins'  Coptic  Pentateuch,  Praef.  ad  finem,  and  P.  de  Laqakue, 
Orientalia,  p.  125. 

3  See  H.  Hyverkat,  Allium  de  Paleographie  Copte,  PI.  19. 
*  ibid.  PI.  18. 


40  The  Copto- Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

The  text  of  Numbers,  which  begins  fol.  166'',  presents  some 
interesting  features  that  deserve  to  be  noticed.  On  fol.  212'' 
(chap.  28.  19)  and  fol.  213"  (chap.  29,  13)  there  are  given  Coptic 
variants  in  the  margin  "according  to  a  MS.  of  the  Arabic 
version":  ^^^  ^~>j  ^^— just  as  On  fol.  7^  and  in  some  other 
places  Arabic  variants  are  cited  from  the  same  source '.  On 
the  same  fol.  213"  we  encounter  a  considerable  lacuna  in  the 
Coptic  text:  chap.  28,  23 — 29,  5  incl.  have  dropped  out  enti- 
rely. This  omission  is,  howev6r,  easily  accounted  for,  since 
29.  6  commences  with  the  same  words  as  2iS,  23,  viz.,  .ytopic 
ijnr.\i.\  (iy^-iJl  ^^jS  ^  in  the  Arabic  version).  But  what  is 
of  greater  importance  is  the  fact  that  the  whole  passage  is 
also  missing  in  the  Arabic;  nor  is  there  any  explanatory  note 
or  any  remark  whatever  referring  to  tlie  lacuna,  although  the 
text  in  question  is  found  both  in  the  Hebrew  and  in  all  the 
recensions  of  the  Septuagint.  AVe  have  here,  then,  it  would 
seem,  a  strong  proof,  that  the  Arabic  version  on  the  margin 
of  our  MS.  was  made  either  directly  from  the  Coptic  of  this 
very  MS.  or,  more  likely,  perhaps,  from  a  Coptic  original  where 
this  passage  had  already  dropped  out. 

Fol.  219''— 221"  contain  the  thirty-third  section  of  JS'um- 
bers  (chap.  33,  1 — 33,  60).  Here  we  see  again  that  the  Arabic 
version  follows  the  Coptic  closely,  whereas  the  latter  is  not 
precisely  so  exact  in  rendering  the  Greek  original;  for  a  later 
hand — the  one  we  think  that  wrote  the  headings  of  the  dif- 
ferent sections— inserted  into  the  Arabic  text  a  few  supple- 
mentary readings  from  the  Septuagint  The  chapter  speaks 
of  the  stations  or  halts  made  by  the  Israelites  in  the  desert. 
Our  reviser  counts  up  in  the  Arabic  text  the  number  of  encamp- 
ments, or  rather— to  be  exact — the  number  of  "moviugs  of 
the  camp",  by  placing  Coptic  cursive  -  figures  over  the  name  of 
the  place  from  which  the  Israelites  started.  In  v.  16  he  adds: 
U-«—  ajJj  ^^  'y-s^j'j  (which  he  designates  as  twelfth  start), 
words  missing  in  the  Coptic,  but  corresponding  to  the  Greek: 

'  See  beJow,  note  1  on  page  4.5.        '  Oalled  Copto-Arabic. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  41 


Kixl  uTT'ipav  fK  T^s  eprjuov  "Zeivd.  Similarly  in  v.  SG*"  he  adds,  as 
the  thirty-third   start,  what  we  read  in  the  LXX:   *cai  aTrTipay 

eK  T^s  eptjuov   Sell/  koI  Trapevk(ia.\ov   d%  tijv   (pijixoi-  'Papdv.    Tha  WOrds 

following:  avT>;  ea-Tiv  KaSr/s  are  found  in  the  Coptic  and  in  the 
original  Arabic,  but  our  scribe  now  adds  v.  37'':  Km  dirripav  Ik 
Kuovjs,  which  he  counts  as  the  thirty-fourth  start,  giving  him 
a  total  of  42  movings  of  the  camp. 

Fol.  225"  Numbers  ends  and  the  colophon  attributes  3835 
stichi  to  the  book:  Apioiioc  on  Bipiiiiii  aim  in  (rroivoc  rtovt; . 
We  may  remark  at  this  j)oint,  that  it  is  to  be  regretted  there 
is  no  indication  whatever  at  the  end  of  Deuteronomy  which 
might  serve  to  complete  the  list  of  the  number  of  stichi  for 
the  Five  Books  of  Moses  from  this  MS  '. 

Deuteronomy  begins  fol.  225''  and  ends  274''  precisely  at 
the  l>ott(im  of  the  page,  so  that  there  was  no  room  for  any 
lengthy  colophon;  merely  a  few  concluding  words  were  added 
in  small  characters,  but  ii\j^\  t-.o;S  —  .LL^I  A_^*^a.  —  c^^ 
is  all  that  remains,  the  rest  has  been  mutilated  and  cut  away. 

Fol.  274  and  275  are  out  of  order.  Fol.  273''  ends  with 
Deut.  32,  52";  the  text  continues  on  fol.  275  (recto  and  verso) 
and  then  runs  to  fol.  274*  at  Deut.  33,  20  ending  at  the  bottom 
of  fol.  274^ 

Fol.  276"   we   read    the    colophon  2;    ^il    j}\jL\    ^\    ^^.^ 

»l_jyJl    ;_i.sr^'°   li-a    J.-vS.\.»;Jl  '^S   <JJ   ^^Ml    f->.J>.iJl    J..i^\jJI    ^UJ\ 

"lu  the  name  of  God  the  Creator,  the  Living,  the  Intelligent, 
the  Only,  the  Ancient,  the  Eternal,  to  Him  all  glory.  This 
is  the  Book  of  the  Holy  Law  which  was  sent  down  (revealed) 


1  SwETE,   1.  c.  p.  346  from   three   Greek  MSS.   gives   3100,  3300  and 

2700,  respectively,  as  the  number  of  stichi  for  Deuteronomy. 

2  Written  probably  by  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  Araliic  text, 
the  numbers  of  the  ij^-^as  in  the  same  and  also  the  indication  of  the 
respective  book  in  the  left  hand  corner  of  the  upper  margin  on  the 
verso  of  each   folio,  v.  g.  (J5^'   ji.~Jl   i_j^^^    -i-^Jl  etc. 


42  The  Copto-Arahic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

to  Moses  the  Prophet  of  God,  peace  be  upon  lum.  And  it  is 
[consists  of]  five  books  that  contain  142  sections."  In  paren- 
theses is  added:  Myf  ^yUS'^  ij:^  (sic)  U  ^^.-tyj.  "in  them  are 
186  allocutions"  (i.  e.  of  God  to  Moses  or  to  the  Israelites, 
as  we  remarked  above)  written  with  red  ink  by  another  hand 
apparently. 

Then  follows  the  number  of  sections  (J^>^)  for  each  single ' 
book,  viz.,  Genesis  47,  Exodus  26,  Leviticus  16,  Numbers  35, 
Deuteronomy  18,  and — by  .another  hand  in  red  ink— the  number 
of  allocutions  (Jlyil)  occurring  in  each  of  the  four  last  books, 
viz.,  in  Exodus  78,  in  Leviticus  37,  in  Numbers  66,  and  in 
Deuteronomy  5. 

The  codex  concludes  with  tlie  ordinary  prayer: 

"Let  praise  be  given  to  the  Lord  of  Glory  always  without 
interruption,  and  His  mercy  be  upon  us  forever.    Amen." 

We  do  not  intend  to  discuss  here  in  detail  the  question 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  Arabic  version  found  in  our  MS.  It 
is  obvious  from  even  the  few  instances  we  have  indicated  that 
the  opinion  of  those  who  believe  the  Arabic  to  be  a  direct 
translation  from  the  Greek  without  the  intermediary  of  the 
Coptic  can  hardly  be  correct.  On  the  contrary  we  hold  for 
certain  that  careful  study  will  bear  out  the  opinion  of  Asse- 
MANi  (1.  c.  p.  114),  that  the  Arabic  version  corresponds  exactly 
to  the  Coptic  and  has  been  made  without  any  direct  reference 
to  the  Greek  original  of  the  latter. 

2)  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  2-4  =  B. 

This  codex  written  in  the  fourteenth  century  was  intended 
from  the  first  to  be  a  bilingual  MS.,  as  is  shown  by  the  neat 
arrangement  of  the  columns  of  the  Coptic  and  Arabic  text. 

Cod.  2  contains  Genesis  and  Exodus,  Cod.  3  Leviticus  and 
Numbers,  Cod.  4  Deuteronomy,  the  three  MSS.  constituting  in 
contents  and  form  one  complete  Pentateuch. 


•  AssEMANi,  1.  c.  J).  115,  gives  27  for  Exodus— evidently  a  typogrn- 
pliical  error;  just  as  he  assigns  279  folios  to  the  codex  instead  of  276. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  43 


The  two  texts  in  our  MS.  were  written  at  the  same  time, 
and  it  seems  that  the  rare  Coptic  corrections  and  the  nume- 
rous Arabic  variants  all  come  from  the  hand  of  the  original 
scribe  who  was  a  certain  Gabriel,  son  of  Phanus,  as  is  stated 
at  the  end  of  Cod.  4.  The  Coptic  text  agress  with  that  in 
Ms.  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  1,  although  a  Coptic  Patriarch  quoted 
by  AssEMANi  (Script.  Vet.  Nova  Coll.,  V,  part.  2,  p.  115)  says 
in  the  Arabic  prefatory  note,  that  the  Coptic  text  shows  a 
number  of  mistakes,  but  that  on  the  whole  the  scribe's  work 
was  well  done ' . 

The  Arabic  text  is  very  much  like  the  one  that  is  found 
on  the  margin  of  Ms.  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  1;  yet  it  is  not  iden- 
tical with  the  latter.  And  the  question  might  well  be  raised 
(a  careful  study  of  the  variants  given  in  our  text  edition  — 
part  II  of  the  present  work  —  affords  excellent  material  for 
suggestions),  whether  or  not  the  Arabic  version  underlying 
these  two  recensions  is  really  the  same,  or  whether  we  have 
two  original  translations,  one  from  the  Coptic  and  only  indi- 
rectly from  the  Greek,  the  other  directly  from  the  Greek, 
with  special  reference,  however,  to  the  Coptic. 

The  codex  is  made  up  of  quinions,  as  is  clearly  shown  by 
the  usual  Coptic  abljreviations  (v.  g.  nATic,  ii\u  etc.)  found 
on  fol.  17*',  18%  27 ^  28''  etc,  and  by  the  Coptic  numerals 
placed  on  the  corresponding  pages  to  show  the  end  of  one 
(v.  g.  IT  on  fol.  17 ''j  and  the  beginning  of  the  next  (v.  g.  r  on 
fol.  IS'')  quire. 

Tiie  first  quinion  ends  fol.  7'';  according  to  this  reckoning 
we  siiould  suppose  that  the  text  begins  on  the  fourth  page  of 
the  MS.  (marked  by  a  later  hand  with  Arabic-European 
numeral  as  1).  But  in  fact  the  Coptic  numerals  (of  which 
several  are  missing,  several  wrong)  marking  the  pages  show 
(v.  g.  S*"  bears  the  mark  =  12)  that  the  text  really  begins  on 
the   sixth  page   of  the  MS.     The   page   preceding   fol.  1"   is 


1  This  Patriarch  is  Matthew,  87  th  Patriarch  of  Alexandria  (1382—1405). 
His  "censura"  bears  the  date:  3rd  Chiach  1115  A.  M.  =  1398  A.  D. 


44  The  Cqpto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

ornamented  with  a  largo  plaited  cross  (which,  however,  is  not 
in  itself  a  sufficient  indication  of  the  liturgical  use  of  this 
MS.),  and  in  tiie  four  corners  formed  by  the  cross-bars  we 
read:  iTi-xn-TiT-iTX,  Jesus  Christ  conquers. 

The  Coptic  text  is  arranged  in  short  sections  as  we  find 
them  ordinarily  in  Coptic  MSS.  of  Scripture,  and  there  is  no 
indication  of  chapters  or  longer  divisions  of  any  kind  in  the 
original  text,  either  in  the  Coptic  nor  the  Arabic.  But  a  later 
hand  has  written  on  the  margin,  beside  of  the  Arabic  text, 
the  current  number  of  the  chapters  in  European  numerals 
(some  of  these,  however,  are  missing).  On  several  pages  (1*. 
4",  27^  52^  67'')  we  find  the  picture  of  a  bird  as  the  initial 
Ali>ha,  and  the  common  arabesfjue  ornament,  with  the  head 
of  a  bird,  flowers  and  a  trailing  stem,  used  in  decorating  the 
margin  (v.  g.  fol.  1"  and  fol.  86»). 

In  the  artistic  head-piece  fol.  1 "  we  read  the  words:  cm 
u(uo.  *Ji\  f,-^,  and  a  little  lower  down  the  introductory  for- 
umla  continues,  in  (Joptic  and  Araliic:  <OJ\  ^^j>v  ,3>>-~^> 
iJoJ^\  yL^  J^Vl  _^i— Jl  ,^^1  ^-^-^  »\jy:J\  ■)[Jl^\  k....^^  ._^j:SJ> 
Genesis  ends  on  fol.  85''  (por  =176  with  the  words  written 
in  heavy  capital  Greek  letters:  i'(;iii;t:i(:  (uioipiiiiii  aiiiiii 
GTOi\(j(;  X"A  =  4600.  Then  follows  a  Coptic  (.'olophon  whii'h 
says:  "Bless  me,  forgive  me,  my  fathers,  who  will  read  in  this 
book;  I  beg  and  implore  you  to  remember  my  lowliness  in 
your  prayers:  and  may  the  merciful  God  reward  you  for  your 
labors.  Amen,  Amen ',  Amen'",  and  this  inscription  in  Arabic: 
^^.s::^-^^'  A(|)  J^Vl  Jl^\  \S.a>  OLils::^-^^^  >•>■'-  ^^^  i^s^^  (j  >j^ 
"it  is  stated  in  a  MS.  that  the  number  of  o-t(x<>i  of  this  first 
book  are  4500  o-tixoi."  This  is  precisely  the  number  given  in 
the  colophon  of  MS.  Vat.  Libr.  Copt.  1  (see  preceding  paragraph). 

Exodus  commences  on  fol.  86'  with  a  short  introductory 
formula:  r^r^'  f^-^   **•   ilrr^'   <j^^  i^^^  ^i-^l   .UJl  ^.^ 

'  The  second  "Amen"  is  written  in  numeric  characters  (JO  =  99  (i.  e. 
AMHN  =  1  +  40  -f  B  +  50).  Assemani  (I.  c.  j).  116)  gives  a  rather  peculiar 
translation:  '•Anion,  noiiayii's  novoiii.     Amen". 


I'art  I,  Chap.  11  45 


and  at  the  end  of  this  book  fol.  IBS'"  we  are  informed  that 
the  scribe  was  the  monk  Gabriel  son  of  Phanus.  On  the 
same  page  there  is  an  epigraph  written  by  John,  the  96th 
Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  23  rd  Mesori  1302  A.  M.  (era  of  the 
Martyrs)  =  1586  A.  D.,  to  the  effect  that  this  copy  of  the 
Pentateuch  was  given  in  perpetuity  to  the  Church  of  Our 
Lady  in  the  borough  of  Zoaila  of  the  city  of  Cahira  (Cairo). 
The  same  dedicatory  letter  is  found  in  the  other  two  volumes, 
cod.  3  and  cod.  4. 

The  Arabic  text  in  tliis  MS.  is  written  very  legibly  and 
on  tlie  whole  it  is  fairly  correct;  but  a  number  of  mistakes 
show  that  the  verdict  given  by  Patriarch  Matthew  concerning 

'the  Coptic  text  (see  above)  applies  equally  well  to  the  Arabic 
version.  The  text  is  but  meagerly  pointed,  in  distinction  to 
MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  which  contains  an  almost  fully  vocalized 
Arabic  text. 

We  find  in  this  MS.  as  in  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  a  number  of 
Arabic  notes,  which  are  either  liturgical  remarks,  or  brief 
indications  of  the  subject-matter,  or  variants  from  other  MSS., 
or  corrections  and  annotations  by  the  scribe. 

Of  the  liturgical  notes  and  the  variant  readings  we  shall 
have  occasion  to  speak  later.  Indications  of  the  contents  are, 
lor  instance,  fol.  9^  o)*-^^-"  '*-'^  (story  of  the  flood),  fol.  26 '^ 
^3,>_w  *.^i>  (story  of  Sodom),  fol.  28''  io^\  CjLo  i^"  (story  of 

-the  daughters  of  Lot),  fol.  2ii"  <^-:^?'  2-<  ^.*'x'^  ^-^  (the  story 
of  Abraham  with  Abimelech).  Of  remarks  by  the  writer  we 
may  mention  fol.  15''  ^.f^^\  ij  ,_y^  IJ-*  o*-^  (this  Cainan 
is  missing  in  the  Aral)ic),  showing  that  the  writer  knew  an 
Arabic  text  translated  from  the  Hebrew';  fol.  23''  he  compares 


1  Because  Gpii.  10, 22  Cainan  is  actually  not  mentioned  in  tlie  Hebrew, 
whereas  his  name  is  found  in  i\w  Arabic  text  of  our  MS.  In  this  place, 
as  also  in  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  fol.  7*  and  elscwhei'e  we  hesitated  whether 
we  ought  to  read  the  variant  u-?;*  (usually  abbreviated  ^  in  our  MSS.) 
or  ^\y^.  Yet  repeated  scrutiny  confirmed  us  in  the  opinion  that  the 
correct  reading  is  (_y>^.  It  would  seem,  then,  that  (_5-?7*  denotes  an 
Arabic  version  made  from  the  Hebrew,  perhaps  Saadias'  translation.  This 


46  The  Copte-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

in  a  variant  the  Coptic,  Arabic  and  the  "correct"  text;  fol.  77" 
,e~^l  Ja*?  ^i  ^-~^  i^i-  '"This  is  missing  in  some  manu- 
script". Several  times,  v.  g.  fol.  3''  (Gen.  2,  4).  fol.  6'  (Ueii.  3, 24), 
we  find  the  rem<ark  'ijiL\  Lut  ^j\,  which  we  take  to  be  a  litur- 
gical note  designating  the  end  of  a  lection:  "up  to  here  is 
the  end". 

The  same  hand  that  wrote  this  model  Codex  also  wrote 
MS.  Copt.  3,  which  contains  Leviticus  (fol.  l"* — 55")  and  Numbers 
(fol.  55—123),  and  MS.  Copt,  i  (60  fol.)  which  contains  the  text 
of  Deuteronomy.  Here,  as  in  MS.  Copt.  2  the  frontispiece 
shows  a  plaited  cross  in  various  colors,  but  vdth  this  inscrip- 
tion distributed  in  the  fom*  angles:  iU-vp-vo-or,  Jesus  Christ 
the  Son  of  God. 

On  the  margin  of  MS.  4  there  are  a  number  of  notes  in  red 
ink  indicating  the  days  on  which  certain  sections  of  the  text 
are  to  be  read  at  the  Divine  Services. 

3)  B.  N.  Paris.    Copt.  1  =  C. 

This  MS.  is  thus  described  by  J.  B.  Chabot  in  his  "In- 
ventaire  Sommaire  des  Manuscrits  Coptes  de  la  Bibliotheque 
Nationale",  Paris  1906,  p.  6:  "Codex  bombycinus  inter  prae- 
cipua  Bibliotbecae  regiae,  si  characterum  elegantiam  spectes, 
ornamenta  numerandus.  Ibi  continctur  Pentateuchus,  e  graeca 
lingua  in  copticam  conversus,  una  cum  interpretatione  arabica, 
quae  copticae  praesertim  respoudet.  Acceduut  notulae  quaedam 
ad  marginem  conjectae.  Is  codex,  manu  Michai'lis,  monachi, 
filii  Abrahami,  anno  Martyrum  ]07(j,  Christi  1360,  exaratus 
dicitur"'. 

This  is  indeed  a  remarkable  manuscript.  It  was  arranged 
from  the  beginning  to  receive  the  Coptic  and  the  Arabic  texts. 
The  pages  are  numbered  with  Coptic  and  Copto- Arabic' 
numerals  on  the  verso,  but  many  of  the  numbers  are  missing. 


assumption  is  not  at  all  improbable,  considering  tbat  Saadias'  version, 
though  perhaps  not  older  than  the  Arabic  text  found  on  our  bilingual 
Egyptian  MSS.,  is  certainly  autiTior  to  the  time  at  which  tliese  MSS. 
were  written.        '  Printed  in  ordinary  Coptic  figures  in  this  Study. 


Part  I.  Chap.  II  47 


The  recto  has  been  marked  by  a  later  hand  with  European 
Arabic  numerals.  From  the  discrepancy  between  the  old  and 
the  new  pagination  (ilT,  12  =  9'';  m,  19  —  16'')  we  are  led  to 
conclude  that  the  first  page  of  the  text  (1")  must  have  been 
originally  foh  3»  of  the  MS.  No  indication  of  quires  ((juiiiions 
or  quaternions)  is  to  be  found  on  the  rotographs  in  our 
possession. 

Fol.  1"  Genesis  begins  with  the  well-known  phrase:  ^i*o 

Foh  91*  we  read  the  colophon  (written  later,  as  it  seems 
to  us):   f^-^    ,iJL,JjH   yi.^  yb^  isl^yiJI   ^^   J^"^'    _«.^\  li"  itX^S^^ 

^^\  C-}^\  cr*  a.nd  at  the  bottom  of  the  page  there  are  three 
lines  perpendicular  to  the  lines  of  the  text:  iijUL*  jxj 
.^JJ  j^sr»-''^  -Aji^^W   Ja-io  y^i.  fxAjLi"  jj  J.-o'^Lj    LijLsi^  Istv^s"**^^ 

AOT    ^    i^w    \^\    Uiili 

"The  collation  and  correction  in  conformity  with  (made 
by  comparison  with)  the  original  was  finished  on  the  nine- 
teenth of  the  montli  of  Choiac  —  and  glory  be  to  God  forever 
and  always  —  in  the  year  1073,  of  the  era  of  the  Martyrs" 
[=  1356  A.  D.]. 

Fol.  91'',  92  and  93  are  left  blank. 

Exodus  commences  fol.  94^  with  the  words:  ^Ij  dJS\  (...wj 
^yi.\  -i-io  ySLM>,  and  closes  fol.  \lh^  with  this  remark  in  the 
margin:  y^  ^^^  i3  3)^^  lilyMI  ^s-  Vsx^s:^^^  ilsUixi  jX> 
A03  iLUo  aj^Ij  j^^  "The  collation  and  correction  according  to 
the  parchment  copy  •  was  fiuislied  on  the  eleventh  of  Tobe  in 
the  year  1074"  [A.  M.  =  1358  A.  D.]. 


'  For  lalj-^Vl  see  E.  QuAiREMfeRE  in  Notices  et  Extraits  des  Manu- 
scrits  de  la  Bibliotheque  Iinperiale,  vol.  VIII  (Paris  1810),  p.  226,  note  4. 
"Le  mot  l^U'K  'lue  j'ai  rencontre  egalement  a  la  fin  du  Pentateuque 
(ms.  Copte  no.  1)  me  paroit  un  pluriel  forme  du  mot  Grcc  yparf>if\  But 
may  the  form  not  rathor  be  taken  as  a  singular?  Compare  Al-Makriki's 
statement:  U^.»\  =  ypdipuf,  in  B.  T.  Kvetts,  The  Cliurclies  and  INIonasteries 
of  Egypt  (Anccdotu  Oxoniensia,  Semitic  Series,  Part  VII — Oxford  1895), 
p.  250,  note  2;  also  R.  Dozr,  Supplement  aux  Dictionnairea  Arabes, 
vol.  II,    p.  204:    |^^-vs\ji  =  ypiKpeloi'.  —  For    3^    see    Quatremere  I.  c. 


48  T/j*  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

In  Exodus,  Lovit,  Numbers  and  Deuteronomy  the  times 
God  spoke  to  Moses  are  counted  up  on  the  margin  l>y  tlie 
original  writer  in  Arabic  numerals  written  in  blood-red  ink. 
(Compare  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1.)  The  Ten  Commandments  are 
similarly  distinguished  (see  below,  chap.  IV,  1).  • 

The  scribe  whose  work  we  have  before  us  deserves  special 
notice  as  a  grammarian  and  a  text-critic  of  no  mean  order. 
He  seems  also  to  have  been  very  conversant  with  the  Coptic 
language.  Of  the  grammatical  and  critical  talent  he  displays 
we  shall  instance  only  two  examples: 

1)  Fol.  5^  Genesis  3.  6 — to  the  word  (Jjha/  epuc|  in  the 
text,  this  annotation  is  maile  in  vertical  lines  in  the   margin: 

UyiV    <|)IKVr  ^i-UI    j^j.^^    Ua-^r?     3^    ^5 

<|)iiAv  v:uj>)Jl  ^_^-^-«-»^ 
<|)iiAi-  npoq  is  derived  from  niiiAV,  "look"  (or  "glance");  there 
is  no  difference  between  iiiiiat  and  <|)MA'r,  both  forms  being 
determined  (i.  e.  having  the  definite  article  prefixed);  (J)IIAT, 
however,  occurs  elsewhere  sometimes  in  the  sense  of  "time". 
2)Fol.  5^  Genesis  3,14,  referring  to  the  word  KujovopTutioK. 
he  tries  to  explain  the  difference  between  the  Coptic  expression 
just  quoted  in  the  second  person  singular  masculine  (to  whicii 
he  adds  J-ol,  "the  original")  and  the  feminine  in  the  Arabic. 
cuil  iovai-o.  he  says,  would  correspond  in  Coptic  to  another 
form,  <;«)?ovopTiieo,  i.  e.  the  second  person  singular  feminine, 
and  it  refers  to  the  word  ("serpent",  which  is  feminine  in 
Arabic),  not  to  the  object.  Thus  also  the  pronoun  >j:^\  refers 
to  <iJ<:>.,  whicli  is  feminine,  but  the  J-o\  (the  original  text, 
i.  e.  the  Coptic)  has  correctly  the  masculine  pronoun,  as  the 
feminine  cannot  be  used  for  that  whicii  is  masculine,  and  in 
the   Coptic   the   pronoun   refers    to   ni^uii   (^^L-aJ),   which    is 


p.  225,  1.  3  and  p.  226,  1.  12:  Jjj  «><s3_wo  =un  exemplaire  en  parchemin; 
also  La.iie'8  Arabic-English  Dictionary,  part  III,  p.  1130. 


Fart  I,   Chap.  II  49 


masculine.   The  note  (i-JiU.)  reads  as  follows:  ccjeoropTiioo 

Ji    CUJ_^  ^^.^-^^   ^ii^  J_js:^.   ^Jj;)^J   i-iiJl  ^  j-==^^^  ^*3    J-^''J>    ^'5 
jj.*     jiU     _^JjJ  I     .-^.^-.aJ     iJ^iJIi     _-^JjJ\     J^Ljo     \-SJwo     ^^IS     Lo 

Witness  to  his  proficiency  in  Coptic  is  borne  not  only  hy 
the  frequent  variants  introduced  by  3  (as  in  A  and  B),  but 
also  by  the  fact  that  repeatedly,  more  especially  in  the  first 
fifteen  pages  of  his  Coptic  text,  he  brings  Arabic  words  above 
or  below  the  Coptic,  not  always  the  word  found  in  the  Arabic 
text  but  rather  an  Arabic  term  expressing  more  precisely  the 
shade  of  meaning  conveyed  by  the  Coptic.  Thus,  for  example, 
fol.  7''  (Gren.  4,  13)  in  Cain's  expression  of  despair:  "My  sin  is 
too  great  etc."  the  Arabic  reads:  ,_^xjlk^;  but  as  the  Coptic 
has  a  masculine  noun  nAiiOBi,  our  scribe  writes  below  this 
word  a  corresponding  masculine  Arabic  noun  ^11^4.. — In  the 
following  verse:  icse  vuajitt  ("Behold  Thou  castest  me 
forth")  he  puts  over  the  letter  x  the  letter  k  and  the  Arabic 
li),  to  which  he  adds  the  remark  ^  (=  t-o,  it  is  correct). 
It  seems  that  thereby  he  wished  to  indicate  the  hard  (k) 
pronunciation  of  the  letter  v  in  the  word  vma  and  that,  per- 
haps, he  had  found  in  some  MS.  the  k  written  over  the  v  for 
this  very  purpose  (comp.  L.  Stern,  Koptische  Grammatik, 
Leipzig  1880,  p.  17,  n.  19.) 

Again  in  several  places  (see  chapters  IV,  V,  XVIII)  he 
writes  the  full  words  for  the  Coptic  numerals  into  the  margin 
(sometimes  even  above  the  Coptic  text)  instead  of  the  Coptic 
ciphers  used  in  the  text:  at  times  he  adds  a  remark  like  the 
following:  J.'oVl  ^  ^^Lo  (explanation  or  precise  meaning 
according  to  the  original,  Gen.  5,  3,  fol.  8"),  or:  ibLjLc  jb 
J.^\)\  ^J.»*  \.s\.^^sr^^  (So  far  the  collation  and  correction  accord- 
ing to  the  original— Gen.  4,  20,  fol.  7'^),  or  simply:  aJjUL.*  jb 
J.-<»'!J\  ^  (So  far  the  collation  according  to  the  original — Gen. 
19,  1,  fol.  27''). 

Rhodk,  Arabic  Peotateucb  in  the  Church  of  Egypt.  4 


50  The  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Fentateuch 

It  remains  for  us  to  speak  of  the  most  interesting  feature 
of  tins  remarkable  codex.  "We  have  already  noted  that  the 
scribe  frequently  endeavors  to  assign  the  exact  Arabic  equi- 
valent of  the  Coptic  phrase  or  word  in  the  very  Coptic  text. 
Yet  this  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  original  intention  of 
the  copyist.  He  wished  to  adapt  his  Arabic  version  much 
more  closely  to  the  Coptic.  For  when  we  turn  tu  fol.  1 ''  of 
our  MS.  we  are  struck  by  the  singular  fact  that  there  are 
two  Arabic  versions  on  the  margin,  one  on  either  side  of  the 
Coptic.  A  careful  scrutiny  of  the  two  texts  reveals  the  fact 
that  the  text  on  the  inner  margin,  to  the  right,  is  a  trans- 
lation made  literally  from  the  Coptic.  The  other  text,  on  the 
outer  margin,  to  the  left,  agrees  with  the  version  found  in  MSS. 
Vatic.  Copt.  1  and  2.  If  we  proceed  to  examine  the  Arabic 
text  found  on  the  first  page  of  our  MS.  (in  tlie  outer  margin) 
we  find  that  it  difi'ers  from  the  version  of  the  Vatican  codices 
just  mentioned,  l)ut  agrees  literally  with  the  Coptic.  Turning 
to  fol.  2",  2''  etc.,  however,  we  are  again  surprised  to  see  that 
the  text  is  almost  word  for  word  that  of  the  Vatican  codices. 
How  are  we  to  account  for  this  phenomenon? 

We  venture  the  following  suggestion.  The  writer  of  MS.  C 
(or  perhaps  of  its  prototype)  intended  to  join  to  his  Coptic 
text  an  Arabic  translation,  which  would  not  so  much  represent 
the  traditional  Arabic  version,  as  serve  for  a  clear  under- 
standing of  the  Coptic  text.  For  this  reason  he  himself  com- 
posed an  Arabic  version,  which  he  entered  on  the  main  (right) 
margin  of  the  MS.  But  before  long,  when  he  had  written 
only  two  pages  of  his  MS.,  he  seems  to  have  encountered  some 
difficulty,  either  that  the  task  appeared  too  irksome  to  him  or 
that  his  new  text  was  too  widely  divergent  from  the  customary 
version  employed  m  the  liturgy.  In  consequence  he  relinquished 
his  design  and  from  the  tliird  page  onward  copied  the  tradi- 
tional Arabic  translation.  But  in  order  that  his  AVabic  text 
might  still  be  uniform  and  serviceable  for  the  liturgy,  he  now 
wrote  on  the  left  narrow  margin  on  the  second  page  (fol,  l**) 
the  usual  Arabic  rendering  of  the  Sacred  Text,  using  red  ink 


tart  I,  Chap.  II  51 


for  the  sake  of  special  emphasis.  Oa  the  first  page,  however, 
this  completion  of  the  ordinary  version  was  rendered  impossible, 
because  on  this  page  the  writer  had  used  very  large  and 
ornate  letters  and  consequently  there  was  no  left  margin  that 
might  be  utilized  for  another  text.  From  this  new  difficulty 
our  scribe  extricated  himself  in  the  best  way  possible  under 
the  circumstances:  he  simply  entered  into  his  own  Arabic 
translation  the  variants  of  the  ordinary  version.  On  the  other 
hand  he  is  loath  to  give  up  his  first  plan  of  furnishing  an 
accurate  translation  of  the  Coptic;  and,  therefore,  in  the  course 
of  his  work  he  marks  into  the  Coptic  text  itself  quite  fre- 
quently the  Arabic  equivalents  of  Coptic  words  and  phrases 
that  seem  to  him  to  call  for  a  more  precise  explanation. 

Thus  it  happens  that  we  have  in  our  MS.,  beginning  with 
Gen.  1,3,  the  ordinary  Copto-Arabic  text  as  represented  by 
the  Vatican  MSS.  mentioned  above.  We  have,  moreover,  in 
the  same  MS.  for  the  first  ten  verses  of  Genesis  a  version 
made  verbatim  from  the  Coptic '.  This  second  Arabic  trans- 
lation we  designate  by  the  letter  Z  in  our  collation  of  texts 
(Part  II,  Sect.  II). 

A  phenomenon  similar  to  that  just  mentioned  as  regards 
Genesis  is  noticeable  at  the  beginning  of  Exodus  and  Leviticus. 
There  we  find  but  one  Arabic  version  to  the  right  of  the 
Coptic;  but  this  Arabic  translation  is  a  literal  rendering  of 
the  Coptic  at  least  for  the  first  verses  of  each  book  2,  and 
some  of  the  variants  are  an  attempt  at  a  still  closer  adherence 
to  the  original.    Compare  the  first  verses  of  Exodus,  fol.  94*: 

1^3^)1  C^yo-^  Cr^i)  y'^^  l-^'    ^i^j^    '*~^    J~^3    i>-r».l^l    ^X^U  I    f-«3-f.-?  ^ 

o'^5        j^^LyOa        y.y^\^       >\^^        j»^Lii.J        ^\'>        OJ^U         T^^'-^^.^       ^^.^'o^.? 


>  The  Coptic  text  of  MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1  seems  to  differ  some- 
what from  that  of  the  Vatican  MSS.  and  to  represent  a  later  recension. 

2  We  are  unable  to  say  whether  the  Arabic  version  of  these  books 
is  uniform  throughout,  because  we  did  not  have  access  to  the  complete  MS. 

4* 


52  Tlic  Cuplo-Arahk-  MUS.  uf  the  FenlaUuvh 


1)  In  the  margin:  ^a  )i^*>  j),  i.  e.  iiaiik:  in  the  Coptic. 

2)  In  the  margin:  'j>^-* 

3)  In  the  margin:  '^J  (he  means  to  say:  ._.J-o  is  not  in 
the  Copt.) 

4)  In  the  margin:  LvJi  ^^l.^  •  (i.  e.  another  MS.  has 
70  persons,  not  76) 

Here  the  attempt  to  imitate  the  Coptic  is  plainly  apparent: 

a)  eTA'i"iul)|>iii        =  Wjj  cr?.>>J* 

b)  eoTcon  =  l-»-;J♦^^ 

C)   IIIOiWI   IIIOVAI  =    j.i>.iyi   >Xi..iyi 

d)  puvr>iiii  =  c^)j 

e)  uA(|\'ii  =  '^^^y* 

Fol.  178%  the  beginning  of  Leviticus,  we  read:  C^j^^  >^>^^ 
^_yX>  gx  fSS3  ^^\l\  ^U  ii>l4,.-iJl  J^  i^^yc  <»juo  fJ^}  i^y^y  <J*  ^^^ 
^\^\  cr^  JjyU  l->b^  i_.}9  1>1  (►i-^  ^UJ\  JS  ^  Ji^  J^j^^ 

Here  again  the  translator  plainly  follows  the  Coptic: 

a)  ovo?   AFim;   cr/Ai'uu   uovl-  euovciic;  =  S-'r''  ^•^^^ 

b)  X(j  rendered  frequently  in  these  versions  by  ^')i\ 

c)  The  addition  ot  C->^  to  Ub^',  corresponding  to  (jiuTc. 
The  text  of  Numbers  and  Deuteronomy  diflers  but  slightly 

from  the  ordinary  Copto-Arabic  version. 

4)  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  33  =  D. 
This  MS.  is  of  rather  recent  date;  according  to  a  note 
at  the  end  of  Deuteronomy  it  was  finished  in  the  month  of 
Amshir  1390  A.  M.  =  1(374  A.  D.  It  consists  of  495  folios 
in  double  columns  symmetrically  arranged  for  two  texts.  The 
writing  is  done  very  neatly;  but  a  careful  examination  of  the 
text  shows  (tlie  variants  in  our  text  edition,  J^art  II,  Sect.  II, 
bear  evidence  to  our  assertion),  that  the  scribe  must  have 
belonged  to  the  class  of  copyists  rather  than  a  student;  for 
his  calligraphy  is  by  no  means  a  test  of  his  critical  correctness. 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  53 


The  title  page  with  the  inscription:  kl^yJI  ^U.* 
i^jLiLJI  bears  the  page  number  b  =  2.  The  next  page, 
however,  where  the  text  of  the  Pentateuch  begins  beneath  an 
ornamental  head-piece,  is  marked  with  the  European  numeral  8, 
corresponding  to  tlie  Coptic  r  =  3  and  thus  the  old  and 
new  pagination  continue.  We  cannot  find  any  clue  in  the 
catalogues  or  on  the  rotographs  in  our  possession  to  explain 
this  defi'erence  of  five  openings  between  the  old  and  the  recent 
foliation.  The  quires  are  distinguished  by  Coptic  numerals 
and  bear  on  the  first  and  last  pages  the  usual  abbreviations 
(i(3,  xv,,  vc,  uTT,  men).  The  first  ends  with  fol.  15^  the  twelfth 
with  fol.  121'';  but  we  notice  that  the  latter  page  corresponds 
to  120''  (i>ii)  in  the  Coptic  foliation — proof  that  either  eight 
pages  dropped  out  in  the  Coptic  numbering  or  that  eight  pages 
were  counted  twice  in  the  modern  marking.  The  arrangement 
of  tlie  (piires  would  then  have  been  by  quinions. 

There  are  no  divisions  whatever  in  the  text;  but  up  to 
fol.  89''  a  European  (?)  hand  as  added  the  numbers  of  our 
chapters  on  the  margin.  There  are  no  marginal  glosses,  no 
corrections,  no  indication  of  copyist  or  origin  ("Herkunft"). 

As  stated  above  (chap.  I,  A)  the  Coptic  text  of  this  MS. 
was  edited  by  David  Wilkins,  London  1731.  Whether  the 
Coptic  text  of  the  MS.  really  contains  the  "exceedingly  great" 
number  of  mistakes  spoken  of  by  De  Lagarbe  (Der  Pentateuch 
Koptisch,  p.  VII  sqq.)  as  being  found  in  Wilkins'  edition,  we 
are  unable  to  say,  because  this  work  is  exceedingly  rare. 
Certain  it  is  that  the  Coptic  text  contains  not  a  few  and  the 
Arabic  text  even  a  very  large  number  of  errors  attributable 
to  the  negligence  of  the  copyist. 

In  fact  both  the  Coptic  and  the  Arabic  version  found  on 
this  MS.  seem  to  be  but  a  copy,  directly  or  indirectly  (i.  e. 
probably  through  tlie  "Tattam"  MS. ',  see  below  chap.  II,  5j, 

'  As  the  first  part  of  MS.  Brit.  Mus.  or.  422,  ■'Tattam",  is  lost,  we 
arc  unable  to  establish  with  absolute  certainty,  what  seeina  to  us  to  be 
actually  the  case,  viz.  that  MS.  Bodl.  Hunt.  33  is  a  modern  copy  of  MS. 
Brit.  Mus.  or.  422. 


54  The  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch 

from  MS.  B.  N.  Copt.  1  (see  above  chap,  II,  3).  The  intro- 
duction to  Genesis  is  literally  the  same  in  both,  in  Coptic  as 
well  as  in  Arabic.  The  colophon  to  Genesis  (t'ol.  126'',  Copt.  = 
piiti  =  125'')  is  very  similar  to,  although  not  quite  identical 
with,  that  of  the  Paris  MS.,  viz.:  y«>  ^^JJl  J^>   *_^^-l   J..*^^  p 

._^\  Ijoc,^  \jo\  Uib  A.!)  ,.-..^1.  .,\UiJ\,.  "Finished  and 
completed  is  the  first  book,  which  is  the  Book  of  the  Creation, 
with  peace  from  the  Lord;  and  remember 'the  poor  scribe  in 
mercy  and  indulgence;  and  praise  be  to  God  for  ever  and 
ever  and  ever.     Amen." 

But  there  is  still  a  much  stronger  argument  to  show  that 
our  MS.  is  in  fact  a  mere  transcript  from  the  Paris  MS.,  or 
at  least  from  the  prototype  or  a  copy  made  from  the  latter, 
and  a  very  carelessly  and  mechanically  made  transcript  withal. 
For  the  scribe  began  to  write  as  his  Arabic  text  the  first 
two  verses  of  his  original  ("Vorlage")  which  represent,  as 
shown  above  (chap.  II,  3),  the  personal  translation  of  the  writer 
of  MS.  C.  He  then  proceeded  to  copy  the  version  found  on 
the  main  (right)  margin  of  MS.  C,  without  noticing  that  he 
now  had  a  mixed  Arabic  text,  viz.  from  Genesis  1, 1 — 10  the 
version  of  scribe  C,  and  afterwards  the  customary  Copto- 
Arabic  translation. 

Another  proof  of  the  negligence  and  the  lack  of  critical 
acumen  on  the  part  of  scribe  D  may  be  seen  in  this,  that 
he  drops  all  the  variants,  remarks  and  Arabic  equivalents  of 
Coptic  words  wherewith  the  writer  of  MS.  C  had  endeavored 
to  render  his  text  more  accurate  and  useful.  This  character- 
istic of  the  work  of  scribe  D  is  further  confirmed  by  the 
observation  that,  in  the  course  of  his  copying,  he  is  guilty  of 
many  omissions  and  ([uite  a  large  number  of  erroneous  readings 
and  faulty  spellings. 

5)  British  Museum  or.  422  =  G. 

This  Copto-Arabic  MS.  is  the  one  that  De  Lagaede  used  for 
his   edition   of  tlie  Coptic  Pentateuch  along  with  the  printed 


Part  I,  Chap.  II  55 


edition  of  Wilktns.  It  is  fully  described  by  him  in  the  preface 
(p.  Ill — IX),  and  from  p.  X  to  p.  XXXVIII  he  gives  a  long 
list  of  variants  of  this  MS.  from  the  readings  adopted  in  his 
printed  text  ("Der  Pentateuch  Koptisch",  Leipzig  1867).  An 
extensive  description  of  this  MS.  is  also  found  in  Ceom's  Cat. 
of  Copt.  ]\rSS.  in  the  Br.  Mus.  p.  315. 

The  volume  was  presented  to  the  monastery  of  Anba  Abshai 
(n^oi)  in  the  Nitrian  desert  as  a  "perpetual  legacy"  (LiS^ 
,_j^l  LJI  ^j--j>jJlJ\  yyJ  I^L*),  as  is  frequently  noted  in  the 
MS.  according  to  Ceum,  1.  c. 

The  date  given  by  the  copyist  fol.  63"  at  the  end  of  Genesis 
in  Copto-Arabic  ciphers  is  1109  A.  M.  =  1393  A.  D.  (not 
i.n  =  1019,  as  De  Lagaede  would  have  it).  For,  as  Ckum  has 
already  remarked,  we  read  there:  LijLj»^  IsrrjT.:^'^  ^  iJoUL*  jb 

1109,  Aerae  martyrum  =  1393  A.  D.< 

There    are    considerable    lacunae    in    Genesis,    Numbers, 

Deuteronomy,  especially  at  the  beginning  (almost  19  chapters 

of  Genesis  are  missing)  and  at  the  end  (3  chapters  of  Deuter- 
onomy) of  the  volume. 

The  colophon  of  Genesis  is  identical  with  that  of  MS.  B. 
N.  Copt.  1: 

There  are  but  very  few  variants  in  the  margin;  v.  g. 
Exod.  37,16  (Septuag.  =  Hebr.  36,38)  to  the  words  ovoi  u^at 
there  is  the  variant:  eroi  ii?out  ^^^  cr*  •*-:s'^''  1^*5 • 
Sometimes  a  more  literal  translation  of  the  Coptic  is  added 
under  the  heading  ^;.uiJl  J^;  e.  g.  Numbers  24,19,  where 
the  Arabic  text  reads:  ^yi-ll  cr^  ^.j^'  '^'-M^^.  ("he  shall 
destroy  the  fugitive  from  the  towns")  the  remark  is  made:  J^i 
*.Xiy..Jl  j^  UJL=j.  l.x^l^  '^^=^.3  Lj^^^'  (the  text  of  the  Coptic: 
"he  shall   destroy   every  inhabitant  out  of  the  city".     And  in 

'  HrvERNAT,  Etude  sur  les  versions  Coptes  de  la  Bible,  p.  10,  adopt- 
ing Lagardk's  statement,  must  be  corrected  accordinglj-. 


66  The  Copto- Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Eentateuch 

general  the  text  appears  to  be  identical  with  that  of  Bodl. 
Libr.  Hunt.  .'S3.  We  shall  speak  at  greater  length  in  a  later 
chapter'  of  the  probable  relation  of  MSS.  C,  D.  and  G. 

Dk  Lagahde  remarks  (1.  c.  p.  IX)  that  the  Arabic  translation 
found  in  the  margin  of  this  MS.  is  not  without  interest,  that 
it  agrees  with  the  one  called  by  Holmes  "Arab.  3"'  (see  below 
Chap.  IV.  1),  and  that  at  least  the  proper  names  are  taken 
from  a  Semitic,  not  from  a  Coptic,  original.  These  opinions 
of  the  eminent  scholar  are  borne  out  by  a  closer  study  of  the 
text  ill  question;  and  although  we  cannot  here  discuss  exhaust- 
ively the  points  in  question,  we  may  refer  to  the  variants 
designated  by  the  letter  "G"  in  the  specimens  of  the  text 
published  in  this  dissertation  (Part  II,  Sec.  II)  as  sufficient 
proof  of  the  truth  of  our  assertion. 

>  See  chap.  VI. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  AEABIC  MSS.  OF  THE  NATIONAL  LIBRARY 

AT  PARIS 

From  the  Bibliotbuque  Rationale  we  selected  for  our  study 
the  MSS.  designated  by  F,  H,  L,  M,  0,  P. 

1)  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12  =  F. 

Silvestre  de  Sacy  in  the  last  part  of  his  famous  monograph 
on  the  Samaritan  Arabic  version  of  the  Pentateuch,  cited 
above  (Introduction,  p.  12,  n.  1)  says:  "J'examinois,  pour  un  autre 
objet,  les  differens  manuscrits  Arabes  de  la  Bibliotheque 
nationale  qui  contiennent  des  versions  des  livres  de  Mo'ise,  et  je 
cherchois  sur-tout  a  comparer  entre  eux  ceux  qui  paroissoient 
devoir  conteuir  la  version  faite  sur  le  grec  des  Septante"  etc. 
(p.  105).  He  then  continues  to  say  that  he  hit  upon  MS. 
Arabic  12  (of  course  of  the  "ancien  fonds",  now  MS.  Ar.  8), 
which  he  found  to  contain  the  Samaritan  Arabic  version  of 
Abu-Said,  supplemented  by  a  Coptic  priest  from  the  Hebrew- 
Arabic  version  of  Saadias  in  behalf  and  at  the  expense  of  an 
opulent  Jacobite  "teacher"  (^a-<),  Atia  Ibn-Fadl-Allah  Abyari'. 
We  quote  this  passage  of  de  Sacy,  because  it  furnishes  a  clue 
to  the  probable  author  of  the  lengthy  note  in  French  found 
on  a  double  fly-leaf  im  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  12  of  which  we  are 
now  speaking.     (We  give  the  anonymous  note  in  Append.  I.) 


'  DE  Sacy,  1.  c.  p.  113,  says:  "Le  titre  de  Moallein  (»J-«-^  iiiontre  que 
c'etoit  un  laique''.  We  cannot  ascertain  on  what  authority  de  Sacy 
bases  his  statement.  j_y>UfJ.6  is  used  in  the  sense  ol'  secular,  layman; 
f-)-*^,  however,  in  Christian-Arabic  Literature  is  the  technical  term  for 
confessor,  just  as  '>t>-»^"  fo""  penitent.  Cfr.  Fr.  ,L  Coln,  The  Nomo- 
canonical  Literature  of  the  Copto-Arabic  Church  of  Alexandria  (in  The 
Ecclesiastical  Review,  vol.  LVI  [1917]).  pp.  113 — 141 ;  particularly  p.  126). 


58  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

This  MS.  containing  the  Pentateuch  in  Arabic  consists  of 
290  folios  (l.'J  lines  a  page)  and  is  written  in  a  very  beautiful 
hand.  The  ttxt  is  pointed  completely  and  pretty  accurately. 
The  first  two  pages  of  Gen.  (fol.  a*"  and  3")  bear  the  following 
couphic  inscription  in  the  artistic  framework  wrought  in  gold 
and   difterent    colors   which    embroiders    the   pages:   il^y  ^jj 

J^Vl  ^i_wJl  ^^j-c  JjVl.  Similar  couphic  inscriptions  are  found 
at  the  beginning  of  the  other  four  books  (see  de  Slane's 
Catalogue,  p.  4). 

Gen.  begins  with  the  words:  ^3i>UJ^  ^\  ^^\  <)JJl(^*-o 
In  the  margin  we  read:  ,>a.Jl  o-r^"^'  f^^- j^^  J^^'  ?><^'  ^^r^ 
>^^\  ^35  ^'JSJ\  ^^.p  j,  1/1^  "Event  ('work')  of  the  first 
day.  [To  be  read)  the  morning  ('at  Prime')  of  Easter  Monday. 
Read  it  also  at  the  Consecration  of  Churches  and  on  Christ- 
mas"— written  by  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  text.  The 
same  holds  true  of  all  the  marginal  and  interlinear  variants 
and  notes  in  this  MS. 

At  the  end  of  Gen.  (fol.  71'')  is  found  the  colophon: 

In  the  margin  to  the  right  is  written  in  red  ink: 

"Here  ends  the  collation  with  the  original  and  the  confrontation 
with  the  Greek,  the  Hebrew  and  the  Arabic — in  the  year  754 
(of  the  Hegira  =  1353  A.  D.)  in  the  middle  of  the  month 
Sa'ban". 

According  to  this  epilogue  the  text  of  this  ^IS.  was  col- 
lated with  the  original  (J-«jV1).  J-«I  signifies  the  underlying 
original  text  ("Urtext"),  in  contradistinction  to  ii-*^-'  which 
stands  for  the  copy  or  model  ("Vorlage"')  from  which  a  tran- 
script is  made.  That  original  text,  it  would  seem,  cannot 
have   been    any    otlier  than    the  Coj^tic;    for  the   writer   says 


.  Part  I,  amp.  Ill  59 


that,  besides  comparing  his  (Arabic)  text  with  the  Greek, 
the  Hebrevif  and  the  (standard)  Arabic,  he  collated  it  '•with 
the  original".  We  have  here  an  important  clue  to  the  na- 
ture of  the  text  found  in  this  MS.  and  in  others  of  the  same 
group. 

Exodus  commences  (fol.  72'')  with  the  words:  ^.^JiJ^  <*JJ1  ^-^ 
J,jMl  jv^l^L  On  several  pages  of  this  book,  v.  g.  fol.  78* 
and  fol.  8P,  it  says:  ^f>-^'^.  *-=jL«^3  Ls^.;^sr^^  iLjULc  jJj 
j_jiL;^l3  ^\y^\^.   Fol.  131''  at  the  end  of  Exodus  we  read: 

\jol   U^b  AJU. 

Leviticus  opens  with  the  invocation  (fol.  132''):  _j~b-^JI  '^ 
JuJLill  and  ends  with  the  colophon  (fol.  175"'):  yi~^  ^^ 
cjryo'^  (__Syi  j^-«  f'^-^  ^^..-05^U^.  Similarly  the  book  of  Numbers, 
beginning  fol.  176''  (JjMl  Jil  <U)\  ,.--0  concludes  fol.  236' 
with  this  subscription:  ^»j  i^JJC^Jl  iil^yJI  ^^  5^^*  yi.^\  J^j 
^5M"\  Jj.  ,*.1i  yLiJI^  J.>.t^^^,^^  j^jXi  >j.i  jj-.^  and  in  the  margin 
is  written  in  red  ink:  \.sx^s^^^  iJ^IX*  ^.  (;)n  Fol.  224  there 
is  a  long  note  in  the  margin  1  supplying  an  omission  from 
Num.  28, 23-29, 5  incl. 

Deuteronomy,  called  iiUiJl  S'^  in  the  couphic  inscription, 
opens  fol.  237''  with  the  words:  (»-:^y^  o'-»=^y^  '*^*  r~"?- 
Several  leaves  in  this  book  are  in  disorder:  fol.  242  should 
be  placed  between  240—241,  and  fol.  246  belongs  between 
244  and  245,  so  that  the  correct  order  of  pages  is  this:  240, 
242,  241,  243,  244,  246,  245,  247. 

Fol.  289''  and   290''  we  read  these  concluding  lines:  cuXj 


'  De  Slane  and  the  anonymous  writer  quoted  in  Appendix  I  say 
.  that  there  is  a  remark  by  the  copyist  declaring  that  he  did  not  find  this 
passage  in  the  original,  but  in  the  Greek  and  in  the  Hebrew.  Prof. 
Hyvernat  claims,  however,  in  his  notes  (see  above,  p.  34,  n.  1) 
that  this  supplement  is  added  ,J-oM\  ^J^s■.  It  is  interesting  to  note 
that  in  MS.  Vatic.  Co\>\..  1  this  whole  passage  is  missing,  both  in  the 
Coptic  and  Arabic,  nor  is  there  any  remark  whatever  that  a  dilFerent 
text  was  found  in  other  MSS.  or  versions.     Compare  Chap.  II,  1. 


60  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

As  we  consider  the  text  found  in  this  MS.  characteristic 
of  an  entire  group,  we  deem  it  appropriate  to  give  here  in 
consecutive  order  the  beginnings  of  all  the  five  books  of  Moses" 

Genesis  (fol.  2''):  J=>^M1  -luili-^  J='/-'^5  ^w-JI  <>JLM  ju^  ,>xJ\  ^• 

u.^  ;^\  ^\  ^\;5  ^_j<ji  ^bLi  ^^)\  ^-s:j  ^1  JIS5  »uj\ 

Exodus  (fol.  72''):  g-c  ,^a^  ^^\  ly^i-i  ^^j.J-J'  J-:^^-''  (.5-4  -eU-^-'  »i-* 
jU.U^.\  y>yt^_  ^^.l^Jw*o  J-:^j^  ''^^  J-*^5  ^a-U  JJf  »-«3-:;?^  S-l?"^- 

•  L»^  ^--jt.--^.-^  I...  a-^  iw-ivii-*-?. u--0^^^;~<  \^A  ^,^\  ^y'y'^^  g->.»> 
Leviticus  (fol.  132'):  ^Is  ii>'^3.-iJ\  i^'cr*  ^^i  i^y^y  S-"/"  "^^J 

isil4;,-iJ\  ids  I >'j   jjl   <j^X«Lj^  '— >~:^  ^   '■'y'5  ' '^"^^  '■*-?-''  C-~* 

Numbers  (fol.  116^):  i!ls  ^3  \j^^_^  J^^  j.  t^^^y  <»JU\  ^^ 
(^3^3j^  i-JLill  AJ.*vJl  j^  j_jjLiJi  y^r-^l  ^^  f^_  J^i  ,1  li^l^j-iJI 
0»f^'.  (i"-!:!^  J-r^'r'-''  (_j-^  isUa.  i_5'^'^*  ^'^  T*^-*  J';'  c-<-* 
i-u^   cr?-r^   *^~^'   *^~*  /^    "-^    r^=-^35r^    »^U--j1    JJ^«    j.4»^'-sI 

Deuteronomy  (fol.  2.57''):  5.;;*^  i^j^y*  ^.  A^  ^-^^  ^UiJIyb  \J^ 

^.^^1  ^'   ^^,^i  ^yi^\   JiU-    ^^^l  j  c^>S^\  c;^  J  J^^r-' 

^y.  y^^->^'^  »rrr*~^  ._^J.JI  ^'>5^:j*JI«  crr^J^  J^y  ob^  o^  '^ 
cxe«rV*  ^-^  i  ^y/  ^^'•'  (i'  r^^  J-^^  J^^T^  *>  ^r^oy-  cr* 

That  the  text  in  this  MS.  represents  the  Septuagint  version, 
and  not  the  Hebrew,  is  beyond  doubt  (see  a  number  of  proofs 


Fart  I,  Chap.  Ill  61 


in  the  anonymous  note,  Append.  I).  In  fact  the  text  is  identical 
with  that  found  iu  the  margyi  (if  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  (see 
above  chap.  II,  1).  Nay  we  may  even  venture  the  assertion, 
that  this  Paris  MS.  v^-as  copied  from  the  bilingual  MS.  just 
mentioned.  We  shall  speak  more  at  length  of  the  relation  of 
these  MSS.  when  treating  of  tlie  groups  of  MSS.  in  a  later 
chapter. 

We  do  not  intend  to  enter  upon  the  question  whether  this 
Arabic  version  was  made  directly  from  the  Greek  or  from  the 
Coptic,  and  whether  the  opinion  of  the  anonymous  critic  (Ap- 
pend. I)  is  to  be  indorsed,  when  he  holds  that  the  ditl'ereuces 
from  the  Septuagint  which  we  find  in  our  MS.  show  that  this 
translation  was  made  from  a  Greek  text  different  from  ours. 
Nor  are  we  at  present  concerned  with  the  nature  of  tlie 
variants,  of  which  de  Slahe  says  that  they  give  the  reading 
of  the  Hebrew  text  and  the  signification  of  certain  words  (see 
his  Catalogue) — both  of  which  statements,  it  seems  to  us,  must 
be  modified  considerably.  All  of  these  questions  require  se- 
parate treatment  and  can  be  satisfactorily  answered  only  after 
a  comparative  study  of  the  text  of  various  MSS.  (compare 
our  text  edition.  Part  II,  Sect.  II). 

In  conclusion,  we  may  remark  that  the  proper  names  are 
almost  always  cited  according  to  a  Semitic,  not  a  Greek  or 
Coptic,  original  (compare  Chap.  II,  5,  at  the  end);  and  that 
the  number  of  sections  in  Genesis  is  47,  in  Exodus  26,  in 
Leviticus  16,  in  Numbers  35  and  in  Deuteronomy  18,  just  as 
in  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  (see  above.  Chap.  II,  1). 

2)  15.  N.  Paris.  Ar.   16  =  H. 

If  DE  Slane  says  in  his  Catalogue  (p.  4)  that  the  first  twenty 
pages  of  this  MS.  are  by  a  later  hand,  this  statement  needs 
to  be  formulated  more  accurately.  For  in  point  of  fact  this 
MS.  consists  of  tliree  parts.  Fol.  1 — 4  are  of  recent  origin; 
fol.  5 — 20  (also  fol.  231  and  232)  are  older,  yet  more  recent 
than  the  bulk  of  the  volume. 

On    fol.  236^    we   read    in    the    colophon    that   the   copyist 


62  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  Ute  National  Library  at  I'aris 

finished  his  work  on  the  23  rd  day  of  Barmhat  (Phamenoth) 
954  A.  M.  =  1238  A.  D.  Possibly  this  is  the  oldest  dated 
Arabic  MS.  of  the  Pentateuch.  Neither  place  nor  name  of 
the  copyist  are  given.  The  precise  age  of  the  second  oldest 
pai-t  of  the  MS.  is  hard  to  determine.  On  fol.  192''  there  is 
a  note  by  a  reader.  Jacob  son  of  George,  dated  1209  A.  M.  = 
1493  A.  D.;  but  as  it  is  found  on  the  oldest  part,  it  furnishes 
us  no  definite  clue.  The  first  four  folios  are  of  a  still  more 
lecent  date.  For  the  guard-leaves  fol.  1  and  2  contain  the 
rules  for  calculating  the  days  of  the  week  when  some  fixed 
feasts  fall,  viz.  New  Year's  day,  Christmas,  the  Baptism  of 
Our  Lord  (j<>U»»,  Epiphany);  also  the  number  of  the  Epactae, 
both  solar  and  lunar,  and  a  list  of  the  days  of  the  month  on 
which  certain  movable  feasts  are  celebrated,  viz.  the  ^}f^^  y> 
(the  Slaying  of  the  Lamb),  the  ^^  (most  likely  the  Fast  and 
the  Pasch  of  the  Ninivites — four  days),  the  f^i)  (the  Carnival), 
the  ,-oi  (the  Pasch)  and  the  J-^yi  ^v^  (the  Fast  of  the 
Apostles).  This  table  extends  from  the  intercalary  (iL..^>^)  i 
year  1404  A.  M.  (=  1688  A.  D.)  to  the  year  1423  A.  M.  (  = 
1707  A.  D.),  and  we  may  reasonably  suppose  that  the  scribe 
wrote  in  the  very  same  year  with  which  he  begins  his  calcu- 
lations. 

Fol.  3  and  4  (belonging  to  the  most  recent  part  of  the 
MS.)  comprise  Gen.  1, 1—2, 10:  fol.  5—20  (the  second  oldest 
part)  contain  Gen.  2, 10— 19,  26. 

Fol.  21''  bears  in  the  upper  margin  a  note  which  is  of  the 
greatest  importance  for  determining  the  nature  and  origin  of 
this  MS.  It  says:  (?)  JIXJl^  cr:^?^^!  ^  cr*  J^^-'^  '-^  ^^^^ 
k-JDI  iwJ  ^^_o  {?)\j^\^  U^I|I  j,.  This  MS.,  then,  is  oriyinally 
a  copy  from  the  MSS.  of  the  Melhites.  but  was  completed  at 
the  beginning  and  at  the  end  from  the  copies  used  by  the 
Copts. 

'  These  rules  and  tables  of  feasts  are  also  found  on  fol.  236''— 239*'. 

2  If  this  is  correct,  the  word  <*■■■>>>._»-•■<  must  be  understood,  not  of 
the  year  to  which  the  sixth  Epagmnene  day  is  added,  but  of  the  year 
immediately  following,  since  1403,  not  1404,  was  intercalary. 


Part  I,  Chap.  Ill  63 


The  fact  that  this  remark  is  found  on  the  first  page  of  the 
oldest  part  of  the  volume,  leads  one  to  believe  that  in  the 
opinion  of  the  scribe  (it  seems  to  be  the  same  person  that 
wrote  fol.  5—20)  the  first  twenty  folios  and  folios  231  and  232 
are  taken  from  a  Coptic  source.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however, 
fol.  5 — 20  are  of  a  difi'erent  type,  as  we  shall  see  further  on, 
and  only  Gen.  1, 1 — 2, 10  (fol.  3  and  4)  are  of  Coptic  origin, 
as  may  be   seen  from  these  specimen  lines:  v-ij^^J^  <*JJ'  (-^•^ 

^j    i^yo   y^    3^)^^^    C-oli'^    Jfj'^^S   iL,-^\  dJ]\    ,3J-i»  i.xJl  ^ 

JU^  i\.^\  ^  Jly  ^\  ^3_^3  y^\  Jji  ^.JJiJl  OJIS'^  i^sr* 
j^Jl  ^JU\  ^^1^^  ("And  light  was  made"  is  missing) _>^\  o:^  '^^ 

This  text  agrees  with  the  one  found  in  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1 
(Chap.  Ill,  1),  literally  with  the  variants,  except  for  the  word 
fL^s^  instead  of  isjL«.X-^^  (see  Part  II,  Sect.  IIj.  In  con- 
formity with  the  ordinary  usage  in  Coptic  MSS.  there  is  no 
mark  showing  any  division  of  the  text,  neither  inside  of  the 
page  nor  on  the  margin. 

It  is  otherwise  in  the  middle-aged  part,  fol.  5 — 20  (Gen. 
2,10 — 19,26).  Here  we  find  the  following  sections  marked 
apparently  by  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  text: 

fol.  8»— 2d  section  (^Lc^^)— Gen.  6,9; 

fol.  13^— 3d  section  (^Isr^V— Gen.  12,1; 

fol.  ITi-— 4th  section  (*^lji)2_Gen.  18,1. 
There  are  also  some  titles  in  the  text  referring  to  the  matter 
under  them,  v.  g.  at  Gen.  5,1;  6,1;  !), H;  lu,  1. 

The  sections  indicated  in  this  second  oldest  part  of  the 
MS.  help  us  to  trace  the  origin  of  the  version  this  part  con- 


^Xs^y 


'  The  scribe  had  first  written  d^\S;  this  he  struck  out  and  wrote 

-o\. 

2  On  the  margin  in  red  ink:  f'-o  _l.sx«o^l\. 


64  Tlic  Arabic  MSK.  of  the  National  Library  at  I'arix 

tains;  for  they  coincide  exactly  with  the  Parasliiyj'ot  or  the 
annual  pericopes  of  the  Hebrew  Pentateuch '. 

A  careful  examination  of  the  text  of  this  part  shows  that 
it  is  identical  with  the  one  found  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4. 

As  to  the  true  nature  of  this  latter  MS.  Ar.  4  (aucien 
fonds  3)  opinions  are  divided.  Thus  de  Slane  (Catalogue,  p.  2) 
thinks  it  to  be  a  Samaritan  text;  de  Sacy^  is  quite  positive 
that  it  contains  the  text  of  the  Septuagint^.  For  the  sake 
of  comparison  we  here  give  the  beginnings  of  the  five  books 
of  the  Pentateuch  according  to  this  MS.  Ar.  4,  from  which 
it  will  appear  that  the  text  was  translated  from  the  Hebrew 
or  the  Syriac,  and  that  it  bears  a  more  or  less  close  resem- 
blance to  the  renowned  MS.  Ar.  1  of  Paris  (from  which  chiefly, 
if  not  solely,  is  derived  the  text  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Paris 
and  London  Polyglots)  and  to  MS.  Leyden  Cod.  377  Warner, 
published  by  De  Lagarde  in  his  "Materiahen  zur  Gesch.  und 
Kritik  des  Pent.  I",  Leipzig  1867. 

Genesis    (fol.    S--"):    OJU^    Jf>J^)\^    ..U-^\    <jJJ\   j).:L  L.    J^l 

,^1     ^\     ^l;5    ;yJl     ^IS^    j^J\      ^^^      ^\       Jli-^       Ul       ^5     J* 

•  Compare  Ginsburo,  Introduction  to  the  Hebrew  Bible,  London  1897, 
p.  66. 

2  In  a  note  on  page  67  of  bis  "Mt'iuoire"  Ljuoted  above  ("Intro- 
duction", page  12,  note  1). 

'  On  a  fly-leaf  at  the  beginning  of  the  MS.  an  anonymous  writer 
has  put  the  following  note: 

Pentateucbus  Arabious  ex  antiijua  uec  plane  cum  vulgatis  consentiente 
interpretatioue  quae  videtur  ad  coJicps  Judaicos  vel  Syriacos  potius  ijuam 
ad  Graecos  iacta. 

Praefatio  de  tratlita  Judacis  lege  deque  traditione  successiva  secundum 
quam  ad  eos  ad  ultima  usque  tempora  pervenerit  multa  habens  iis  siniilia 
quae  in  eandem  sententiam  habentur  apud  .Tudaeorum  magistros  in  libro 
Pirke  Abbotli,  Maimonide  etc. 

Codex  antii]uus  et  bonae  uotae  cum  adjunctis  adnotatiouibus  quae 
plerumque  ad  niysticos  Scripturae  sensus  aut  quaedam  doctrinao  christi- 
anae  capita  referuntur. 


Fart  I,  Chap.  Ill  65 


Exodus  (fol.  33''):  \^>  ^>J1  J^l^l  ^_^  U--1  sJ^a^ 
C>^**-^J    J-^i)    '^^^    J^'5    f-<3-^    i-^J  ^  S-l?-^-  S''  J-^^  ci' 

Leviticus  (fol.  57-'j:  ^sr^--'   l^  ^^  a^IjL^  Kj^y°  ^^^  ^^i 

Numbers  (fol.  73"):  ^:Jl-*3Ml  aJj  ^  LL;^  ^^L  ^k  i_3-^^'«  -^ill  ,J^ 
J^l^l  l_j.o  l_5=>-_j^  M  i-JLLII  ix^  jj  i^i-^'  yy-^\  o-*  ?y.  J3*  (3 

Cjy^}    ^4j)6l.«XI    J.^jlj.-*il    ,_yO    >J^ft    I ^*»<a.l    i*,J   ijlsj  y^^  Jpj^  i^_y» 

CU>   J^  L^   *J^   O^-r^   O-?'   Cr*  j^^   ^   jy^j^U^l  j^ju    (,,4j5bl 

Deuteronomy:    ,^    i^^y    Ur?     (^    o-^*    Otd^lsr^-'^    si-a 

.*4y^l    <JO     <jJJl     !i_xil     U-> 

Comparing  the  three  texts  in  question  we  uiay  draw  up 
the  following  comparative  table: 

B.  N.  Ar.  1  B.  N.  Ar.  4  Leyd.  Cod.  377 

Different  Genesis  Similar 

Different  Exodus  Identical 

Identical  Leviticus  Different 

Different  Numbers  Identical 

Identical  Deuteronomy  Different 

Thus  MS.  Ar.  4  agrees  with   Leyd.  Cod.  377  in   Gen.,  Exod., 
Numbers,  and  with  MS.  Ar.  1  in  Levit.  and  Deuter. 

Of  the  Leyden  codex  De  Lagaede  says  in  his  preface  (1.  c. 
p.  IV)  that  Genesis  and  Exodus  are  made  from  the  Hebrew 
and  represent  the  Saadias'  version,  Leviticus,  Numbers  and 
Deuteronomy,  however,  from  the  Syriac  (but  not  from  the 
Syrohexaplar). 

BuODE,  Arabic  Pentateuch  in  tlie  Cliurob  of  Egypt.  5 


66  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

As  to  the  real  nature  of  the  text  found  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  1 
(or  more  precisely,  ou  the  Arabic  Pentateuch  version  of  the 
Paris  and  London  Polj-glots)  much  was  written  in  former 
times ',  and  even  in  oiu-  day  the  question  can  hardly  be  said, 
in  the  writer's  opinion,  to  have  been  decided  scientifically  and 
definitely.  It  is  generally  admitted  that  MS.  Ar.  1  contains 
the  version  of  Saadus.  But  there  is  much  conflicting  manu- 
script material  that  requires  careful  sifting,  before  it  can  be 
safely  decided  whether  the  text  found  in  the  Polyglots  is  the 
real  Saama^*'  text,  or  a  revision  made  by  some  Hebrew  or 
Christian  scholar,  or  perhaps  even  a  mixture  of  several  Arabic- 
Hebrew  or  Arabic-Samaritan  recensions. 

Certain  it  is,  however,  that  the  text  in  the  MSS.  mentioned 
is  not  the  Samaritau-Arabic  version,  nor  is  it  made  from  the 
Septuagint,  but  from  the  Hebrew. 

These  remarks  were  deemed  necessary  in  order  to  give  the 
reader  a  fair  idea  of  the  nature  of  the  version  of  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  4,  from  which  the  second-oldest  part  of  MS.  Ar.  16  of 
which  we  are  treating  has  been  taken. 

And  it  is  further  to  ,be  observed  that  the  numerous  cor- 
rections written  between  the  lines  and  on  the  margin  of  the 
oldest  portion  of  MS.  Ar.  16  are  taken  from  this  (Ar.  4) 
version.  On  the  other  hand,  w'e  notice  on  the  margin  of 
MS.  Ar.  4  a  number  of  corrections  or  variants  in  Carshunic 
taken  from  the  version  found  in  the  oldest  part  of  MS.  Ar.  16; 
V.  g.  fol.  53*  (Ex.  35,11)  the  word  <JJilki,  corresponding  to 
the  Hebrew  I'DlpTlN  (taches)  is  interpreted:  ooa^laao  =  It^^^i}^^ 
of  MS.  Ar.  16. 

Fol.  20''  we  read  in  the  space  below  the  text  at  the  bottom 
of  the  page:  3j^^  ij*  cr^^^^i  ij,>U.I  s'lJiJl  ^y^.  LJL*  ^^^ 
1*.xju  ^SJ\.  "And  from  here  is  read  tlie  thirty-first  lesson 
on  the  leaf  following."  Fol.  21*  follows  the  title:  31st  lection, 
and  tlieu  it  says:    J\   li^  ^l^^ciXll  ^-Jls  ,_yXJ\  ^^  ^_j»   \JSa. 


'  Compare    "Introduction",   page    12,   note   1.    Also  P.  Kahle,  Die 
arabischeu  Bibelubersetzungen,  Leipzig  1904,  p.  VII— -XI. 


Part.  I,  Chap.  Ill  67 


"Thus  in  all  the  copies  which  'the  Christian'  commented".  Here 
the  oldest  part  of  the  MS.  begins  (fol.  21—230,  232  —  238).  In 
the  margin  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  second-oldest  part 
of  the  MS.  seems  to  have  added  the  so-called  j-;^-«-»J"  (com- 
mentary, exhortation),  possibly  from  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  11,  under 
the  rubric  i>JjUw  (note,  postscript),  followed  by  the  words: 
Jli-Jl  J  Is,  or  -JLa-Jl  ^i\yQjJ\  J  Is.  Fol.  59''  Exodus  begins 
and  ends  on  fol.  108''.  Fol.  IDS'"  contains  only  nine  lines,  the 
rest  of  the  page  having  been  left  blank.  The  text  takes  up 
again  on  fol.  106*.  This  break  occurs  at  Exodus  39,8.  Le- 
viticus extends  from  fol.  109''  to  fol.  145'',  Numbers  from  146'' 
to  192'-,  Deuteronomy  from  193*  to  236  ^ 

Genesis  and  Exodus  in  this  oldest  part  are  divided  into 
lections  (s-elyi)  for  the  time  of  Lent  and  some  feast  days. 
Genesis  comprises  57  lections,  Exodus  20.  These  liturgical 
indications  are  almost  without  lacuna.  They  are  written  by 
the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  text  of  the  bulk  of  the  volume. 
In  Exodus,  especially,  these  remarks  are  interesting  in  as 
much  as  they  mention  the  Egyptian  names  of  the  months, 
V.  g.  fol.  60''  at  the  fourth  lection  we  find  the  rubric:  "to  be 
read  on  the  feast  of  the  Annunciation  tind  on  the  29  th  Barm- 
hat",  fol.  76-'  we  read:  "on  the  17th  Thoth  and  the  feast  of 
the  Baptism,  ^_yjlk»". 

Leviticus,  too,  is  divided  into  lections,  thirteen  in  number, 
marked  in  the  text.  Numbers  shows  in  the  text  the  sectional 
divisions  called  Jy«as,  in  all  twenty-two  (some,  however,  are 
not  indicated). 

We  have  already  remarked,  that  in  Gen.  2, 10 — 19,  26 
(the  second  oldest  part  of  the  MS.)  we  find  in  the  text  the 
indication  of  three  J-s^^,  that  correspond  exactly  to  the 
Parashiyyot  of  the  Hebrew  Text '.    In  like  manner  we  find  in 


•  Fol.  231''  and  232*  bear  no  indication  of  section  or  diWsion  of  any 
kind  at  Deuter.  32, 1  (Paraehah  53),  although  they  are  written  by  the 
same  hand  that  wrote  fol.  5 — 20,  and  might,  therefore,  be  expected  to 
show  at  this  place  the  sign  _l3a.^o\  or  iJ^\^. 


68  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

the  maigin  of  Exodus  six  _ls^\  indicated  (from  the  6th  to 
the  11th;  the  9th  is  not  expressed  but  only  marked  by  red 
dots  in  tlie  margin  and  a  red  line  under  the  first  words) 
corresponding  again  exactly  to  the  Parashiyyot.  Turning  to 
MS.  Ar.  4  from  which,  as  already  stated,  MS.  Ar.  16  has 
evidently  been  supplemented  and  corrected,  we  find  that  Genesis 
is  divided  into  twelve  As^\  and  Exodus  into  eleven  ^1-^^^, 
tliat  are,  too,  just  like  the  I'arashiyyot  of  the  Hebrew  Bible. 
Leviticus  and  Numbers  in  Ms.  Ar.  4  are,  however,  divided 
into  twenty-eight  and  thirty-six  _ls^\  respectively,  not,  indeed, 
equal  in  length  to  the  Hebrew  Parashiyyot,  but  corresponding 
exactly  to  the  sections  (_lsr°l)  which  we  find  in  tlie  margin 
of  Leviticus  and  Numbers  in  MS.  Ar.  16,  marked  by  the 
same  hand  that  wrote  the  middle-aged  portion  of  this  remark- 
able MS. 

And  as  in  MS.  Ar.  4  there  are  no  sections  at  all  in 
Deuteronomy,  so  also  we  find  no  division  whatever  indicated 
in  the  margin  of  MS.  Ar.  16;  nor  is  there  any  lection  (s-tlyi) 
■or  section  (J-«as)  marked  within  the  text  of  Deuteronomy,  and 
only  one  title  is  written  in  the  margin,  viz.  fol.  234'':  iS^i  \j.* 
^_^^,  "this  is  the  blessing  of  Moses". 

To  enable  the  reader  to  compare  the  text  of  IMS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  12  and  its  group  as  well  as  that  of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4  with 
the  version  represented  by  MS.  B.  N.  A.  v.  16,  we  place  here 
the  beginnings  of  the  books  of  the  Pentateuch  according  to 
the  latter  MS.,  exclusive,  however,  of  Genesis,  which,  as  was 
stated  above,  is  of  later  date  in  its  first  nineteen  chapters. 

Exodus  (fol.  m''):    \^>   ^^^.JJI    S^\y^\    ^    U—l    ^M^L* 

\_ji^>    <^-^     J-*S    H="^    J^=>.l^    J^   <>4r^^   ' >S)^-^.  &-*  x"^^   i_y^' 

Tjeviticus  (fol.  109"):  ii.>Ug.~iJl  iJXs  j^^  <)^^^  ^.s^y*  ^^  '^^5 

li\    fi-J^    J^^\    Jj    ^    (sic)    J^j    J^^lj--*    or^    (^    -sJ    J^S 

r^b  o'j^*  cr*  f^^'/  c^^L:^  fi>Ur^>  cr*  ^J^.f  s^yj  s-y 


Part  J,  Chap.  Ill  69 


Numbers  (fol.  14(;''):  1-^^  )^  *j^  ^_;9  i^^^  vy*  f^? 
i_)L^a-    J.iL    <*.J   Jls^  ^^.<i-!   J=jl   ^^    J-Ol^-^1    ^_j-o    j5^  cr* 

Deuteronomy  (fol.  193"):  J.-.5\^l  ^x^  ,^-^y  *-"^"  Jy^*  *-^ 

J,  ^J.J>  ^Ls"^  IJl=^  ^3^  Jl  7-»'-«'  J-=-  (J>  '-r^.j-?^  ^^  "^-J^-  r^ 
,__y--j^  ^   ^^.^   j,^j    J^\    j_jia  ^.^   ^>U.l  j.<3..J:..J\   j,   j;j..*»i^l    <^X^ 

That  we  are  dealing  with  an  Egyptian  MS.  or,  at  least, 
with  one  that  was  used  in  the  Church  of  Egypt  is  beyond 
all  doubt.  The  dating  according  to  the  era  of  the  Martyrs, 
the  names  of  the  months  in  the  colophon  fol.  236"  (Barmhat) 
and  in  a  number  of  rubrics  (v.  g.  Exodus  15,22,  fol.  76-'  "to 
be  read  on  the  17th  Thoth";  Exodus  41, 1,  fol.  107''  "to  be 
read  on  25th  Athyr"),  the  Arabic-Coptic  numerals  used  to 
designate  the  number  of  stichoi  at  the  end  of  Genesis— all 
these  by  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  oldest  portion  of  the 
MS. — give  certain  proof  that  we  have  before  us  a  manuscript 
of  the  Church  of  Egypt  (Melkite  Branch,  see  above  in  this 
paragraph),  and  most  likely  one  that  was  used  for  liturgical 
purposes. 

Reserving  for  another  chapter  (VII,  B,  1)  a  summarized 
discussion  of  the  rubrics  and  liturgical  notes  found  in  our 
MS.,  it  only  remains  to  list  some  of  the  sub-titles  given  in  the 
text  of  Numbers  under  the  indication  of  the  section  {^J-<^) 
and  sometimes  even  taking  the  place  of  any  other  mark  of 
division.     Thus  we  find: 

Num.  5,  8  -:—  iAi>  Lil  ,_ji*  i,L^,  law  concerning  trespassing; 
„        5, 11    —  isj-^-aJl  ^-^.^j  law  of  rancor,  jealousy  (?); 


70  Thf  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

Num.    6,   1  -     cU..wJ\  a-Uj.  tlie  law  of  asceticism; 

„  6, 22  —  OiiyJl  ilw  IJofc,  this  is  the  law  of  the 
blessings; 

n        7,    1   —  ^J-JI   o'-J^^^^  »->-J«>.    this   is   the  beginning 
(initiation,  dedication?)  of  the  altar; 
in  the  margin:  LU-^j'^l   ^^j   ,;^lJi,  offer- 
ings of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribes; 

„        8,    1   —  rj**^'  i-U^c.  law  of  the  lamps; 

„        9,    1  —   -^aiJl  ij.^,  law  of  the  pasch; 

„  15.17  —  ^-La^  J>j\  j,  ^^^\riJ\  is^,  law  of  offer- 
ings (to  be  made)  in  the  Land  of  Canaan; 

„      15,37  —  ■t'^^'  aLLw,  law  of  the  tassels; 

„      19,    1  —  _^.tjK";.M  AJ.«o,  law  of  jturification; 

„  19,14  —  <>jJLil^\  j.  0*-»^\  ,jr^  <>J-^.  law  concerning 
one  who  dies  in  his  dwelling-place  (tent?); 

„      20,    1  —  UJ>  ysr^,  the  rock  of  water; 

„      20,23  —  c>S/^  z^y^-  ''^•^'^^  of  Aaron; 

„  26,57  —  ^>.4^^^j>3  cy^.j^' ■''^ ''^i  this  is  the  number 
of  the  Levites  and  their  families; 

„  31,  8  —  f^^  ^*-*-*  '^*'-*5'  iind  these  are  the  names 
of  their  kings; 

„  33,  1  —  fj,^i.^\^^  J^\y^\  j_y;j  rij^  '-^5)  and  this 
is  the  departure  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  and 
their  stations. 

3)   B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  <J  =  L. 

This  beautifully  written  MS.  contains  the  entire  Pentateuch, 
according  to  the  same  version  that  is  found  in  the  oldest  part 
of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16.  but  without  any  commentary.  There 
are  hardly  any  marginal  notes,  and  the  few  that  are  found 
are  nothing  else  than  words  or  phrases  omitted  by  the  scribe 
through  oversight  when  copying  his  MS. 

But,  even  so,  there  are  prtrts  missing  in  several  places; 
V.  g.  Gen.  5,13,  the  first  half  of  the  verse  is  lacking  owiug  to 
the  scribe's  confounding  the  J^y)L^r^  at  the  end  of  verse  12 


Part  I,  Chap.  Ill  71 


aucl  in  the  middle  of  verse  13.  It  seems  that  this  codex  was 
copied  from  a  liturgical  MS.  but  that  the  writer  omitted  the 
indications  of  the  lections  and  the  so-called  j.y-.J^.  For  at 
times  the  introductory  ^,  omitted  at  the  beginning  of  a  new 
lection  in  a  liturgical  codex,  is  also  missing  in  our  MS.,  and 
at  the  beginning  of  Chap.  XVITI  of  Gen.  we  read:  Aill  yi^y 
^►.-ji^M,  instead  of  <*J,  as  the  Scriptural  text  says,  just  as  the 
liturgical  MSS.  taking  up  a  new  lection  at  this  place  had  to 
insert  the  proper  name  instead  of  the  pronoun. 

This  original  MS.  cannot  have  been  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  10  (see 
next  paragraph),  because  Ar.  9  contains  passages  which  are 
lacking  in  Ar.  10,  v.  g.  Gen.  .5, 25.  Possibly  it  was  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  16  in  its  original  state;  for,  whereas  the  latter  MS.  is 
dated  1238  A.  D.,  as  said  above,  the  former  was  completed 
in  the  second  Rabi'a  of  the  year  683  of  the  Hegira  =  A. 
D.  1283. 

Genesis  begins  on  tol.  1''.  In  the  original  pagination  in 
Copto- Arabic  ciphers  this  is  fol.  3'';  and  both  foliations  are 
completely  carried  through  the  volume  with  this  discrepancy 
of  two  pages.  The  introduction  to  the  first  book  of  Moses  is 
rather  elaborate,  written  in  six  lines.     We  read: 

*.J\)  \    dJy>.^    ^^X^    (J,  v^)  \    |<>->.->^  \    <^JJ  I    />-*<-^-» 

"In  the  name  of  God,  the  Ancient,  the  Eternal.  We  begin 
witli  the  help  of  God,  who  made  known  to  His  friends  His 
creative  works  and  his  laws,  to  write  the  Five  Booke  of  Moses, 
the  greatest  of  the  Prophets.  Book  First.  Book  of  the  Creation 
of  the  World." 

Each  page  contains  thirteen  lines,  and  on  the  top  of  the 
page  in  the  centre  the  number  of  the  chapter  found  on  that 
page  is  marked,  in  our  Arabic  numerals.  Wherever  a  new 
chapter  begins,  this  is  indicated  by  a  vertical  line  drawn 
between  the  last  word  of  the  preceding  chapter  and  the  tirst 


72  T)ie  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Kational  Library  at  Paris 

of  the  following  one.  Otherwise  there  is  no  division,  section 
or  lection  mark  in  the  whole  book  of  Genesis  or  in  the  other 
four  books.  Only  at  Deuteronomy  33, 1  do  we  find  the  remark: 
"this  is  the  blessing  of  Moses",  just  as  in  Ar.  16— whicii  con- 
firms our  opinion  that  MS.  9  must  liave  been  copied  from  a 
liturgical  codex,  the  r-;^— iJ'  and  the  titles  having  been  omitted. 

The  text,  as  has  already  been  said,  is  exactly  like  that  in 
Ar.  16.  But  as  the  latter  is  defective  in  its  first  pages  and 
shows  a  "Coptic"  beginning  of  Genesis,  we  deem  it  opportune 
to  add  here  the  first  verses  of  Genesis  from  MS.  Ar.  9,  so 
that  a  complete  set  of  opening  verses  of  the  different  books, 
as  represented  by  the  group  to  which  MS.  Ar.  16,  Ar.  9  and 
others  belong,  may  find  a  place  in  our  work.  (See  this  Chapter,  2.) 

Genesis:  _^  J>J^\  cuilS,  J'^^JI^  ^U-Jl  iJ^\  jX^  J5MI  ^ 

J^\_5  ^^^  ^^\  J.  <U)\  ^^  j^\  ^1^3  ^^\  ^^  i^\  Jli-^ 
^IS'^   ^LJ    LftU;    k^)i^\^  ULv>  jy^\   ,^>i  ^..^Ikll^  y^\  ^^  dJ}\ 

.^X^.l«      a^^      _.L..>0      /^v^3      «Lm.wC 

As  to  the  nature  of  the  version  found  in  this  MS.  de 
Slake  (Catalogue,  p.  3)  says  it  is  made  from  the  Septuagint. 
Doubtless,  there  is  much  similarity  lietween  this  text  and  the 
Septuagint  version.  Thus,  to  mention  only  one  point,  the  age 
of  the  Patriarchs  at  the  time  when  they  begot  their  first  born 
(V.  Chap,  of  Gen.)  is  given  according  to  the  Greek,  except  in 
the  case  of  Lamech  (v.  28),  who  is  said  to  have  been  182  years 
old  when  he  begot  Noe,  in  conformity  with  the  Hebrew  text, 
as  against  the  Septuagint,  which  assigns  him  188  years.  We 
cannot  here  enter  into  the  details  of  this  intricate  and  inter- 
esting subject.  Suffice  it  to  call  attention  to  the  paradoxical 
fact,  that  although  the  text  ajjpears  to  be  substantially  that 
of  the  Greek   version',   the  order  of  ciiapters  and  verses  is, 

•  Yet  we  must  say  that  in  quite  a  few  instances,  especially  with 
regard  to  the  proper  names,  the  text  represents  a  Hebrew  original,  or 
rather,  yet  more  accurately,  the  Syriac  version.  Compare,  for  instance, 
the  first  verses  of  Deut.,  esjjecially  Lilj^  f^j  —  i''-ss»»  V-"''  (,'•  6-  Kadesh- 
barnea,  in  v.  2). 


Part  I,  Chap.  Ill  73 


undoubtedly,  that  of  the  Hebrew  Bible'.  Thus  in  Gen.  31, 
46-  51  (fol.  50''  and  50'')  we  read:  \y-,^\  ^^Isr^V  ^^i*i.  JUi 

i^b"^  L(bLi^«  i-'i^  ULsiL  Lis" 1 5  ^k-oK  L*^,--»ai«  'ijisr^  l^.»,s*  isjls.^- 
^b'il  <^J  Jli'^  ''l^ljiX^  i^L^^Ij  IaU-voI  i_jyLso^  !S>L<3-iJI  i^U 
UUo^  ^IaX^j.  laU-^  i^JJ-Jj  f^-J'  '-'■-^5  (_y^?  is\>.Alij  i^t^Jl  sj..* 
Sycl  j!j  Jr^-^  '->'^  ^-^^3  U-^-T:^  '*^-'-'*  S^--^.  J'-*  ''jg^-WJI  .=tvs:'l 
i-U\     .liil    U^     £J43.-^.U    S.s^^   )i^     c.y' '■'^     i^^-"-'     '^O*     <*.-^a.l^     J-W.4 

a)  the  Hebrew  n»bj  —  b)  nsSIp,  watch-tower  —  c)  Hebrew:  10«M 
3f>»;;^  pb,  Syriac:  aQ.&:^A.  ^^  f»lo. 

Similarly  in  Gen.  35, 16— 21,  and  also  Exodus  20, 13— 15, 
Exodus  35,8—19,  Exodus  36,  8-40,  32,  of  which  we  quote  the 
opening  lines:  iliJl  JL»b\  "jl^..^^  i—j^XiJl  (sicjl^^SL^  J-:^-*^  jX^is 

^.a'-t^J  I      *.>j^li>.     j^       llL     |^_jy*      Vji     l^i^s^     LsiX)     r=>-"^'     13^^"^^    v_r^-»-=^' 

.JXilS^  jiL^Jl    i3-°-"'^'    i3   i3t^^'  ^i->i^J\  ci,-..XoU^  (_j  !!•  ft  j^,^..^.^.o-i.»  !!«,» 

a)  Throughout  tliis  passage  the  verb  is  put  in  the  plural,  as  in  the 
Syriac,  against  the  Hebrew.  The  text  itself  difl'ers  considerably  from  the 
Septuagint. 

Again  in  Numbers  1,  24-37;  6,  22-26;  26,  15-47. 

Nevertheless  it  is  but  fair  to  remark  that  in  the  beginnings 
of  Exodus,  Levit.,  Numbers  and  especially  of  Deuteronomy 
which  we  have  cited  from  MS.  Ar.  16  (see  above,  Chap.  Ill,  2) 
the  text  shows  decided  discrepancies  from  the  Septuagint 
reading.     Would  reference  to  the  Syro-hexaplar   and   to   its 


'  Comi].  Swete's  Introd.  to  the  Old  Test,  in  Greek,  Cambridge  1900, 
p.  231  sqq. 

-  See  Field's  Origenis  Hexaploruni  ([uae  supersunt,  Oxonii  1875,  the 
note  at  the  end  of  the  36th  Chap,  of  Exodus,  Tom.  1,  p.  150. 


74  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

Arabic  translation  (MSS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Land.  or.  243  and  Laud, 
or.  2.58).  perhaps,  furnish  a  clue  to  a  plausible  explanation  ot 
these  phenomena '  ? 

4)  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  10  =  M. 
This  MS.  containing  the  Pentateuch,  with  the  same  y-^f'j^ 
inserted  between  the  text  that  is  found  on  the  margin  of  MS. 
B.  N.  Ar.  16,  is  not  complete  in  its  original  script.  The  first 
page  has  l)een  supplied  by  a  later  hand  and  from  a  text 
heterogeneous  to  the  rest  of  the  MS.  Genesis  begins  fol.  l*" 
with  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity:  ^^^^  c^^'^i  >— '"^*  r-*^ 
u — o  *S^^  ^;_,,**..si.j  <>>JU\  ^^,  j^j.JOJ  j^^\^  (sic)  i^\  |y>jJJ\ 
^^j^\  Ll^  ^^j'.  ,_5^'  ^i^  ^^oJ-iLJl  ii'\^_j;Jl  and  the  first 
thirteen  verses  of  Chap.  I,  in  a  translation  difiering  somewhat 
from  that  of  any  other  MS.  mentioned,  as  is  evidenced  by  the 
first  lines:  ^^   J>)^\  C-Jls^   JfJ^'^i   '..♦-c^\   <>JJ>   ,_3i;».   *j^\   ^ 

iJ]\    ^^^    LU.>s^  ^,^1    d<U\    ^W^  ^»>J\   J6^  \^y   ^XJ  AiJl   JU;^ 

In  fact,  however,  four  pages  were  missing;  and  as  only  one 
has  been  replaced,  there  is  a  lacuna  from  Gen.  1,13  to  Gen. 
2,  21:  J-«^3  ^U-il  J.^1  S^\^  f'-^i  li'L-^  fi\  J.S.  <UJ\  ^U 
<»JwX>  Ui,  which  is  the  second  verse  of  tlie  sixtli  lection. 
The  modern  foliation  did  not  take  account  of  this  gap,  and 
hence  there  is  a  difference  of  three  between  the  old  Copto- 
Arabic  and  the  later  European  numbering  of  the  pages  (thus 
2"  =  5^  17"  =  20"  in  the  original  paging). 

There  is  another  lacuna  between  fol.  53  and  54,  extending 
from  fol.  57  (old  foliation)  to  fol.  64  (old  foliation)  inclusively, 
which  covers  the  end  of  Genesis,  beginning  with  the  67  th 
lection,  and  the  beginning  of  Exodus  almost  to  the  end  of  the 
6  th  lection  (the  7  th  lection  begins  at  Exodus  6,  14). 

Accordingly,  Exodus  begins  on  fol.  54"  (64"  old  pagination) 
with  the  last  two  words  of  Ex.  6,  6:  "Judiciis  magnis". 

'  See  Hastings.  Dictionary  of  tlie  Bible,  IV.  p.  447'  and  p.  659. 


Part  I,  Chap.  Ill  76 


There  are  a  number  of  variants  in  the  margin,  inti'oduced 
now  and  then  by  the  title:  ^^^1  is-^-*  ^i,■,  but  the  writinf^, 
ta'lik  ou  the  whole,  in  these  notes  and  in  fact  throughout  the 
MS.  is  rather  poor  and  indistinct. 

The  other  three  books  bear  the  profession  of  faith  in  the 
Divine  Trinity,  and  are  called  by  the  same  names  as  in  MS. 
Ar.  16:    Leviticus    (fol.  89'')  c^.^\  y^,  Numbers    (fol.  12n«) 

and  in  the  colophon  (fol.  153'')  it  is  called  ^j^»;  for  there  we 
read:    ^  ^j^\y^\  ,_y-o    >^t.  ^a^    sl^^xJl    ^^    ^?>r"    yL^l   J_»^ 

*_j'  j43-w  ^j_;xi   ^>L«^JI^  ^^jO)!^   AJi,*o   t_aJl   .*.X.»<i  |^-^*<^    r*"^  J^Jli 

sblk^^.  According  to  this  note  the  MS.  was  finished  on 
Monday  the  19  th  day  of  Sayual  of  the  year  730  (of  the  Hegira) 
which  corresponds  to  the  13  th  Mesori  of  the  year  104()  (of 
the  Martyrs)  =  A.  D.  1330;  and  it  is  added  "on  the  6th  day 
of  the  month  Ab",  so  that  we  have  the  Moslem,  the  Coptic 
and  the  Syriac  dating  on  this  manuscript. 

Deuteronomy,  too,  bears  the  same  exceptional  title  that  is 
given  this  book  in  MS.  Ar.  16:  iiUiJI  y^^,  and  at  the  end 
(fol  177'')  we  notice  the  colophon  joMl  J,l  U^b  xi}  ■^^^^^ 
(3  ^jL.iiy^  sjLi^l  ^j^.^:^^  xU\  ^^}■^  '*-?.;>^*  J-»^  here  we  expect 
the  date;  but  the  scribe,  possibly  to  look  up  the  exact  date 
of  the  month,  broke  off  abruptly,  and,  being,  perhaps,  detained 
by  some  unforeseen  circumstance,  omitted  through  forgetfulness 
to  return  to  his  work.  Another  hand  (the  reviser's?)  has 
added  immediately  below  : . . .  (Jl  r^^^  j^-^jJI  t_->U5Ul  IJob  ^i,  jJlL 
sblkiL  ^\y-^  ■  ■  ■  ^M  ^-"b  3  J'-^.  y^i  "The  humble  servant 
examined  this  book  up  to  .  .  .  [perhaps  iyL\  "its  end''?J  and 
he  asks  every  one  who  applies  himself  to  . . .  (the  study  of 
the  same)  ...  [to  pray?]  for  the  pardon  of  his  sins". 

5)  B.  N.  Paris.    Ar.  11  =  0. 
This  MS.  shows  many  of  the  characteristics  of  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  16.     As  in  the  latter,  a  considerable   part  of  the  original 


76  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

MS.  is  lost.  Fol.  1 — 19  are  of  recent  date';  the  verso  of  fol.  19 
is  left  blank.  The  older  portion  of  the  MS.  contains  the  same 
text,  the  same  liturgical  notes  and  the  same  j-:^*-^'  that  are 
found  in  MS.  Ar.  10  and  Ar.  16  (where  the  ^~>ij"  is  put  in 
the  margin).  Twenty-four  folios  of  the  original  script  had 
perished;  but  as  the  repairer  supplied  this  lacuna  from  a  text 
without  commentary,  there  is  now  a  difference  of  five  between 
the  old  Copto-Arabic  and  the  modern  foliation.  Almost 
twenty-one  chapters  of  Gen.  are  lacking  of  the  old  text:  for 
tol.  20''  (Copto-Arabic  25'')— the  original  portion  of  the  MS. 
begins  fol.  20" — we  find  the  indication  of  the  33rd  lection 
(5th  Friday  of  Lent),  i,  e.  Gen.  22,  1.  Fol.  35  has  also  been 
replaced  by  a  new  sheet  of  paper,  which,  however,  remained  blank. 
The  same  repairing  hand  is  seen  fols.  52—63,  the  end  of 
Genesis  and  the  beginning  of  Exodus.  One  leaf  between  the 
two  books  is  left  entirely  blank.  Fol.  63"  Exodus  is  intro- 
duced  with   the  title:   'i\jy^i\   ,^  i^L^'  _;•*--  y>5  r^*^'  r*-*^ 

It  is  interesting  to  note  how  this  title  and  also  the  text 
on  the  recent  pages  of  Exodus  agree  with  MS.  Ar.  4;  whilst 
the  beginning  and  end  of  Geuesis,  supplied  by  the  same  hand, 
are  taken  from  a  different  source. 

Fol.  64",  Ex.  2,  5,  where  the  old  part  begins,  we  find  the 
liturgical  note:  "second  day  of  Passion  "Week  in  the  evening", 
iust  as  in  MS.  Ar.  10;  and  the  text,  too,  agrees  perfectly  with 
the  latter,  except  that  at  times  Ar.  11  has  a  faulty  reading 
(or  a  slight  variant)  where  Ar.  10  has  the  ordinary  and  more 
correct  term;  viz.  Ex.  6,  16  Ar.  10  writes  ^_y<--^.  Ar.  11  ,,7^-;^. 
Fol.  «7  (blank),  88  and  89  are  also  recent. 

At  the  end  of  Exodus,  fol.  Ill*'  (old  part)  we  are  told  that 
the  scribe  finished  his  work    on   the  22nd  Du-'l-ka'da  of  the 

1  First  verses  of  Gen.:  Cj'->5  *U-»J*  O*^  <*>^t  3^^  i3>^'  (3 
<JkS\JU\    ^^    AlJJiJl^   ii'J.i>..'.»...«  y-^^    lu^xi-*    -^    iJv"^'  Colfj   Jfj"^^ 

■  'UJl  ^  Jf  <UI1  ^^j^ 


Part  I,  Chap.  Ill  77 


year  731   (of  the  Hegira),  the  24th  Mesori  of  the  year  1047 

of  the  Martyrs  (1331  A.  D.),  the  16th  Ah (Compare  this 

Chapter,   4,  towards    the    end):   ,_y>l-iJl  (sic)    J.^^  yi~^\  J^i 

^>l.^a    liXA,-»ixJLI    ^^jO)l»    rfiji.,/^,vo2    I iul    i^.,^    j^_.w-<    ^j_yj _-.;xj>.J  1^ 

As  in  MS.  B.  N.  Copt.  1  (see  above,  Chap.  II,  3)  and  in 
MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16  (paragraph  2  of  this  chapter),  so  also  in  the 
older  portion  of  this  manuscript  the  words  Jls  or  ^^i  intro- 
ducing a  speech  of  God  to  Moses  or  to  the  people  are  written 
in  red  ink. 

Leviticus,  fol.  112"  (old  part)  begins  with  the  invocation 
of  the  Blessed  Trinity,  and  the  text,  divided  into  lections,  is 
exactly  like  Ar.  10  (and  Ar.  16).  Fol.  137  and  138  have  been 
inserted  later.  The  thirteenth  lection  (Chap.  25,  1)  bears  the 
sub-title  J=;M1  cxj-^  i^vo,  and  at  Cliap.  26,  1  there  is  a  note 
saying:  "from  here  to  be  read  on  New  Year's  day"  (compare 
Chap.  IV,  2:  MS.  K).  We  also  find  a  few  lines  of  com- 
mentary interspersed  here  and  there  in  this  book,  but  sparsely, 
just  as  in  Leviticus  in  MS.  Ar.  Ki  -and  MS.  Pocock.  219 
(Chap.  IV,  2).  The  colophon  (just  like  in  Ar.  10)  speaks  of 
this  "scanty"  tafsir,  fol.  149'':  ^i-^  ^a^  cuJ^l  ji.^\  J^ 
!i_^.»«-a.j  ^^y<ij.^S  Lo^  j^^o^NUl.  Then  follows  the  customary  praise 
of  God  and  a  petition  to  pray  for  the  poor  sinful  scribe. 

Numbers  (fol.  150-' — old  pag.)  begins  the  same  way  as  in 
MS.  Ar.  10.  There  are  only  some  very  slight  variants  in  the 
text,  V.  g.  Num.  1,  3  ^J^  U,  instead  of  3y  ij}- 

The  book  is  divided  into  chapters  (J.^);  we  also  again 
meet  the  numerous  sub-titles,  'Jj^^,  which  we  have  noticeJ 
when  speaking  of  MS.  Ar.  16. 

Of  Deuteronomy  the  first  three  folios  are  new.  This  ex- 
plains the  difference  in  title  fi-om  that  by  which  the  fifth  book 
of  Moses  is  called  in  the  other  MSS.  of  this  group:  k'^Ul  ^j.^ 
^_,^^lil  ^a^  ix.^J\,  whereas   in    the    other  MSS.  it    is    styled: 


78  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  National  Library  at  Paris 

'i'-JJiJ\  ji— ).  Fol.  191—195  arc  all  that  remains  of  the  original 
text  of  Deuteronomy  (there  is  no  sign  of  any  division  in  this 
part).  All  the  rest  of  the  book  is  of  recent  origin,  and  the 
text  differs  in  many  little  points,  though  not  very  considerably, 
from  that  of  MS.  Ar.  10  and  Ar.  16.  Jla  and  ^  are  here, 
too,  written  in  red.  The  book  ends  with  a  short  colophon, 
without  separation  from  the  last  verse  of  the  text,  testifying 
that  it  was   finished  Tubeh  25th,   1316  A.  M.  (1600  A.  D.): 

(^\S^  ,0)1  U>)^.  ^^jUriJl  *l.M»-iwM  ATiT  a<^^  Sy^\  bj^  ^,4^ 
J\.  Then  follows  the  name  of  the  donator,  hut  it  has  been 
erased  and  replaced  by  another,  which  cannot  be  deciphered. 
The  colophon  ends  with  an  invocation  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
and  the  Evangelist  St.  Mark. 

6)  B.N.Paris.  Ai-.  18  =  P. 

This  MS.  contains  only  the  Book  of  Genesis  with  a  lengthy 
commentary.  The  text,  both  in  the  older  and  later  (such  as 
fol.  1-9,  229-250)  portions  of  the  MS.  is  identical  with 
that  of  MSS.  B.  N.  Ar.  9.  10,  16.  Only  the  first  verse  differs: 
^   J>J^\    cJir^  J=.jV\  Ob_5   ^U — II  Ob  <OJ\  jX=L  ^j^\  j, 

^UJI    3^    V_9J>    <>JJ\     _5j^    AjS~'   JiyS  <*«»lkJI^    sJoCL*.^     ^«    ii.yh  .'  <l 

(compare  MS.  Ar.  11).  Then  follows  the  heading:  ^.;^«».^iJJ\ 
and  the  commentary  on  the  two  verses  goes  on  for  about  a 
page  and  a  half.  Fol.  3*  the  Scripture  text  continues,  intro- 
duced by  the  title:  i_jUXJI.  After  three  verses  of  text  comes 
the  next  "tafsir";  then  on  fol.  20"  the  sixth  verse  of  Genesis  is 
taken  up.  All  of  which  reminds  the  writer  very  strongly  of  MS. 
Bodl.  Libr.  Marsh.  440  (see  below.  Chap.  IV,  3).  In  fact  the  divi- 
•sion  of  the  text,  the  words  i_jl^^l  (^KaS^)  and  j---~ixH  (-.-.^kwi 
the  first  words  of  the  commentary  ^J.^1  ^_j»ojJUl  (■  "■'^  ■"-,  -'^j 
and  its  length  seem  to  point  to  the  conclusion '  that  we  have 


>  Since  we  liave  only  parts  of  MS.  18  at  our  disposal,  we  are  unable 
to  establish  our  conclusion  with  certainty. 


Part  /,  Chap.  HI  79 


in  MS.  Ar.  18  substantially  the  same  text  and  the  commentary 
of  St.  Ephrem,  which  MS.  Marsh  440  contains  in  Carshunic. 
As  the  identity  of  the  text  of  MS.  Ar.  18  with  that  of  MS. 
Ar.  16  is  beyond  doubt,  de  Slane's  statement,  that  the  version 
found  in  Ar.  18  is  made  from  tlie  Peshitto,  has  been  suffi- 
ciently discussed  above  (Chap.  Ill,  2j  when  treating  of  the 
nature  of  the  version  found  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16. 

It  may  be  asked  whether  the  inscription  (fol.  T')  claiming 
this  to  be  the  version  of  the  "I'enowned  Abu-'l  Barakat"  (t.jLxS' 
i-Jl    CJ6yJ\    ^_5J^)   isl.ydl    ^^    J*i"^'    yA.^\)    deserves    any 


credit.  As  it  is  found  on  the  part  added  later  to  the  original 
MS.,  we  may  well  doubt  its  genuineness.  The  verso  of  the 
guard-leaf  at  the  beginning  of  the  book  l)ears  a  note  by  a 
reader(?)  with  the  date  10:^4  of  the  Martyrs  (A.  D.  1307/8). 
It  would  seem,  then,  that  the  original  MS.  belongs  to  the  13  th 
century.  The  latter  portion  of  the  book  (fol.  329 — 353)  is  of 
still  later  origin;  in  fact,  the  pages  of  this  part  are  not  all 
written  by  the  same  hand  nor  are  they  of  the  same  date. 
At  the  end  of  the  book  (fol.  348  "■)  the  scribe  tells  us  that  the 
text  is  said  to  comprise  4600  stichoi,  just  as  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16; 
i_aVTiju^l   ^^1   lisA^3  ^  J'-J^j  is'^^l   ^f^   J«i"^*    ,-a-^l   J.^S' 

j.^_  is:***->  (but,  alas,  no  date  is  given  "when  he  finished  copying", 
the  rest  of  the  line  left  blank!)  ^^)\  (Jl  \^\  L^\>  <UJ  ^/^^^ 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  ARABIC  MSS.  OF  THE  BODLEIAN  LIBRARY 

AT  OXFORD. 

Of  the  numerous  Arabic  manuscripts  of  the  Pentateuch  at 
the  Bodleian  Library  we  have  selected  four  only  for  special 
study — those  designated  by  E,  K,  X,  X. 

1)  liodl  Libr.  Laud.  or.  272  =  E. 

This  magnificent  Ar.  MS.  formerly  known  as  Laud.  A  182 
was  used  by  Holmes  and  Parsons  in  their  famous  edition  of 
the  Greek  Old  Testament  (it  is  cited  there  as  Arab.  3).  The 
author  of  this  translation  of  the  Pentateuch  is  not  mentioned; 
the  :MS.  was  written  in  the  year  1064  A.  M.  (1347/8  A.  D). 
The  pages  are  numbered  with  the  simple  Arabic  (not  European) 
numerals;  the  last  is  235. 

The  first  thirteen  pages  contain  a  preface  about  the  Law 
given  to  Moses  by  God,  handed  down  from  age  to  age  through 
the  Prophets  and  High-priests  and  preserved  througli  all 
vicissitudes  and  the  many  wars  in  which  the  Jews  were  in- 
volved, down  to  the  time  of  Annas  and  Caiphas. 

The   text   begins   fol.  7''   with    the  introduction:  <>JJ1  (.-wj 

AjLJiiLl  ^i-^  ^_«.  To  the  left  of  iiLAil,  a  little  lower,  there 
stands  a  word  wliicli  we  take  to  be  n'C^sna  in  Hel)rew  cursive 
characters.  Something  similar  seems  to  be  the  case  on  fol.  55% 
Genesis  47,  28. 

There  are  properly  no  divisions  of  the  text  The  first 
section  called  r-^^^^  which  is  rather  surprising,  is  not  followed 
by  any  other  section  mark  in  Genesis;  this  is  also  the  case 
in  the  othei  three  books  (Ex.,  Levit.,  Deut.),  which  begin  with 
the  J^"^*.  J-^,  110  other  Jj-vai  follow.  Numbers  has  not  even 

% 


Part  I,  Chap.  IV  81 


this  one  indication  of  a  chapter- the  text  begins  immediately 
after  the  title  of  the  book.  Yet  it  is  worthy  of  mention  that 
in  the  Hexaemerou,  after  the  work  of  a  day  has  been  described, 
the  closing  verse  is  written  each  time  in  larger  characters  and 
in  a  separate  line.   We  notice  a  similar  phenomenon  at  Gen.  2,4 

(fol.  9"):  Jpj'^->^}  ^U^l  XiiiL  I iUJ  \S.a,.    After  that  it  occurs 

but  very  rarely  that,  when  there  is  a  change  of  subject  in  the 
text,  about  one  line  is  written  in  larger  characters. 

All  notes,  interlinear  or  marginal,  whether  in  blue  or  red 
or  black  ink,  seem  to  be  of  the  same  hand  as  the  text.  The 
reason  for  the  diversity  of  inks  is  not  apparent.  The  notes 
and  variants  in  this  manuscript  ai'e  not  very  numerous;  some- 
times they  supply  omissions  in  the  text  or  make  a  correction, 
at  other  times  they  indicate  the  contents,  v.  g.  fol.  12''  i-ciii 
^^^Ls^kJ  \ ;  generally  they  are  of  a  liturgical  character  v.  g.  fol.  7 '' 
Gen.  1,  1:  >'^-y^i\  ^.y.  j,}  ^y*iU5Jl  ^j^./-'^  ^j^  cj-rr^"^'  fS^.  '7*-'> 
fol.  57-'  Gen.  49,  33:  iL^>l^\  Xs>^l.\  ^^  ij^il  ^y,,  on  Friday 
of  the  sixth  week  [of  the  Fast],  i.  e.  Friday  of  Holy  Week. 
From  Exodus  3,  3  to  Deuteronomy  34,  4  all  speeches  of  God 
to  Moses  are  counted  up  from  1  to  18G,  in  blue  ink,  Copto- 
Arabic  figures  being  placed  in  the  margin  (compare  MSS. 
A,  C,  H,  0). 

Genesis  closes  fol.  58"  with  a  colophon  in  four  lines  enclosed 
in  an  ornamental  rectangular  frame: 

i*.J^S^    ^^.«.^a-«    «^X^lJ"^    <*.JJl     ^^-X-J     J-0^ 

from  which  we  see  that  the  MS.,  as  stated  above,  was  com- 
pleted in  the  year  1064  of  the  era  of  the  Martyrs  on  the  last 
day  of  the  month  of  Hatur,  i.  e.  November  1347  A.  I).  Below 
this  is  written  in  a  single  line:  i_-JJ...»J\  j^l-aJl  o^>^\  x^ 
A.sr*L^*J\  JJ^-^,  jA^  »_Jb^^xJl  iLj!^\  j,  ^-til  toy.  "This 
was  written  by  the  weak  and  sinful  Thomas,  the  wretchad  one 
among  the  priests,  the  monk  and  he  asks  for  indulgence". 

Bhode,  Arabic  Fentateuoli  iu  the  Church  of  Egypt.  6 


82  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  BocUeian  Library  at  Oxford 

Of  thisTMS.  H.  G.  Paulus  treats  rather  extensively  in  his 
"Commeutatio  Critica",  Jena  1789.  cited  above  ("Introduction", 
p.  12,  n.  1).  His  quotations  are  at  times  inaccurate '.  "We  agree 
with  him,  however,  in  his  main  contention,  that  the  version 
found  in  tliis  MS.  is  made  from  the  Septuagint,  as  against 
the  opinion  of  Vei  who  says  in  his  Catalogue  (Vet.  Test.  Ar.  I, 
p.  29):  "Vei-sio  plurimis  in  locis  ab  editis  discrcpans,  Hebraeo- 
Samaritauis  potius  quam  Graecis  codicibus  videtui"  consen- 
tanea".  This  remark  shows  that  Uri  cannot  have  made  a 
comparative  study  of  the  text.  For  there  is  no  doubt  that  we 
liave  here  the  Septuagint  text  in  an  Arabic  version  (compare 
our  text  edition,  Part  11,  Sec.  II). 

2)  Bodl.  Libr.  Pocock.     219  =  K. 

This  manuscript  which  consists  of  216  folios  is  "usu  et 
vetustate  passim  corruptus,"  as  Uei  says  in  his  Catalogue  (Arab. 
Christ.  IV,  p.  30).  It  contains  the  Pentateuch  divided  into 
lections;  at  the  end  of  most  of  the  lections  of  Genesis  and 
Exodus  we  find  short  commentaries  in  the  form  of  homilies. 
The  author's  name  is  not  given;  neither  is'  the  date  nor  the 
place  of  origin. 

This  codex  is  of  great  interest  to  the  student,  in  as  far  as 


>  We  mention  two  instances  (only)  in  which  his  interpretation  is  not 
borne  out  by  the  manuscript.  Gen.  4,  7  (fol.  lO"")  Paulus  quotes  wl^Ljo«.U3 
vM .  ^.^T^  (1.  c.  p.  61)  and  says:  "Hie  notandum  est  v.  7  pro  iuiapTts  versi- 
onem  ponere:  in  ambitu  tuo  peccatum  tuum,  id  quod  cum  hebraeo  magis 
consentit".  We  must  confess  our  inability  to  see  on  what  Paulus  bases 
this  opinion  even  in  the  transcription  given  by  himself.  In  point  of  fact 
the  passage  reads  thus:  (.itX^ka.  ki)jLJC:k.Lj,  i.  e.  in  thy  power  (or  through 
thy  own  free  choice)  is  thy  sin  (compare  the  variants,  below  in  Part  II, 
Sec.  II).  Again  on  page  62  he  cites  Gen.  6, 14:  "Alex.  m/3<«;o»  »  fuXuv 
Terpayovai'.  Versio:  ^yi^))  i ■<  >•»•*•  ^^  '^t^  (sic!)  lw>-«J>  navem  quadra- 
tarn  ex  ligno  Laisus.  ^yi^y  quid?''  This  ingenious  suggestion  of 
"Laisus  wood"  vanishes  when  we  see  in  the  manuscript  that  ^^-*o_  "^ 
are  two  words,  not  one.  and  that  the  text  really  roads  (fol.  1-J*'):  IXis 
^y^.  M)-^""'*.  ,^  \My^^  (make  thee)  a  boat  of  wood  that  dt>es  not 
decay. 


Part  I,  Chap.  IV  83 


it  supplements  the  version  found  in  the  oldest  part  of  MS. 
B.  N.  Ar.  16. 

The  old  Copto-Arabic  foliation  is  greatly  at  variance  with 
the  modern  reckoning;  thus  folio  66^  is  £a  (61-')  in  tlie  original 
numbering,  67"  is  £b  (62")  etc.  These  Copto-Arabic  figures 
are  placed  in  the  left-hand  margin  of  the  recto  at  the  top  of 
the  page;  a  little  lower  to  the  right  we  find  Syriac  numeral 
letters;  v.  g.  fol.  66"  =  i  (60),  fol.  67"  =  J  (61)  etc.  The  reason 
for  this  difference  in  pagination  (66"  =  61"  Copto-Arabic  = 
60"  Syriac)  is  not  apparent.  The  quires,  ^^X  which  consist 
of  five  leaves  each,  are  also  counted  in  Copto-Arabic  ciphers, 
and  by  a  later  hand  in  Syriac  numeral  letters. 

Genesis  begins  on  fol.  7''  with  the  invocation:  <*JJl  ^-^ 
(JoU^Xir*  »^LXa.M  j-r^l  ^JJ\  <)JN)l  iJ_jj<_o.i  ^^^  ^LJ\  ^^  ^J'i^ 

Then  follows  a  rubric,  i.  e.  two  lines  in  red  ink:  J^Ml  ^i.^\ 
cy°  J^^  o-rr*^"^^  ?^-rr'  i^r-'H'.  *-^  ci^"^^  Js'lj-JiJl  LJ^xll  ^^^  ^i_^ 
il.^  ^XiUJl  fy^*-  "The  First  Book.  Book  of  the  Creation 
of  the  World.  The  first  lection  from  it.  Read  on  the  first 
Monday  of  the  Holy  Fast  in  the  evening".  The  book  is 
divided  into  fifty-seven  lections.  In  the  fourth  we  meet  three 
lines  of  explanation  or  commentary  known  as  j-y^i^  between 
Chap.  1,  26  and  1,  27.  After  the  fourth  lection,  Gen.  2,  3, 
there  follows  a  j-^^-^iJ'  of  about  a  -page,  and  so  generally  after 
each  lection  an  explanation  is  added,  introduced  by  the  word 
-.y.^JcJ\  written  in  red.  This  "homiletic  commentary"  usually 
begins  with  some  passage  of  the  text  just  read;  a  short  moral 
reflection  is  made  on  it;  then  another  sentence  from  the  peri- 
cope  is  cited  in  direct  or  indirect  quotation,  explained  or 
developed.     Sometimes  the   commentator  passes  over  to  other 


'  Here  follows  a  sign  which  looks  exactly  like  the  Copto-Arabic 
cipher  for  500  (())).  This  mark  is  found  repeatedly  at  the  end  of  the 
lections  or  the  commentary  (sec  lection  1,  2,  6,  56,  57).  Very  often  this 
sign  is  used  in  Christian-Arahic  MSS.  to  denote  the  end  of  lengthy  para- 
graphs; but  we  are  not  able  to  suggest  its  special  significance. 

6* 


84  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford 

sentences  of  Holy  Writ  bearing  on  bis  subject,  and  occasion- 
ally, but  only  very  rarely,  he  ventures  into  the  tield  of  literal 
exegesis  or  textual  criticism. 

The  commentary  is  generally  written  in  somewhat  smaller 
characters,  and  each  line  is  preceded  and  followed  by  a  red 
point  in  the  margin.  Here  are  a  few  brief  specimens  of  this 
r-y^s^i  After  the  fourth  lection,  fol.  8''  the  coinnientator  remarks: 
UUIj  L^Jl^  \j!^\  Jli'^  U^^lj  ijr^M^  /i-Jl  J)^  UiJ  ^1  Jlii 
.xXs.  Ugj  U^jS'.b  iS'^Jl   iS~»>  L«3^  Uiy  ^^   Uy<:^  ^V^S   Jfy^^ 

^\  U^jJO.^  Lo  After  the  fifty-seventh  lection,  fol.  67-^,  he  tells  us: 

^  .... 

(sic)  Lw^jJ^    f'^'i    A-i-4j    j^^>J^    *r*^i  y^  '^^^   <^  '— *-**'^.  i^b 

j^  ^\  .jj  ^X>  ^)  ^\  Jvfr^  ^\  ^^\  dSyt  ^Xt^  iJL^  ^-^L»J  U^.^ 
l«AJL-oJ    ^1    ^J^\y^\    j_yO    AJ"j^\    (_y«05l    iXSy'l    'j^-<a^    >— *-~'5^.    AJI-^l 

"Joseph  became  ruler  of  Egypt  when  he  was  thirty  years 
of  age  and  he  remained  ruler  over  it  for  eighty  years.  And 
when  he  was  about  to  die,  he  was  firmly  convinced  that  the 
promise  of  God  would  doubtless  be  fulfilled  which  he  had  made 
to  the  sons  of  Israel  saying":  "Behold,  I  shall  lead  you  out 
of  the  laud  of  Egypt".  And  on  account  of  his  trust  in  this 
promise  Joseph  ordered  his  brethren  the  sons  of  Israel  to 
carry  up  his  bones  with  them  when  they  themselves  would  go 
up  etc." 

There  are  but  few  variants  noted  on  the  margin;  v.  g. 
fol.  66^  (Gen.  50,  2)  there  is  the  remark:  llLM\  *.«*-•>  ^i, 
referring  to  ^..-JaIs-»-'*  in  the  text;  fol.  68-':  ^^».^.-_»*^^  ks:^^  ,^, 
speaking  of  the  city  of  Ramasses,  called  ^^^^^L*^^  in  the  text. 
Sometimes  rather  long  omissions,  due  probably  to  oversight, 
may  be  noticed ;  v.  g.  Gen.  3,  28  is  entirely  lacking. 

Genesis  concludes  on  fol.  67''  with  the  colophon:   Jl^\  J.^ 

\j^j^  \j^\  \^\>  ,UJ  ^y^\}  cr^^y^^^  4600  stichoi,  just  as  it 
was  stated  in  the  colophon  of  Genesis  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16 
(see  above,  Chap.  Ill,  2). 


Part  J,  Chap.  IV  85 


At  the  commencement  of  Exodus,  fol.  68',  we  read:  <*JJI  f-^ 
(J,^')i\  'i\yJii\  j-^yi-l  j-«->«J  _j-*5  i\j^\  ^^  (^jjl-^'  .i-^\  f-;;s^y  O-o-^y^ 
^j-JLJl  f_j-«aJl  J^l  ,^_y^'Ml  f^J.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that 
in  this  manuscrii^t,  too,  the  words  JU  and  ^  introducing  a 
speech  of  God  to  Moses  are  always  written  in  red  ink. 

-  In  Exodus,  Leviticus  and  Numbers  we  notice  the  same 
liturgical  remarks,  indication  of  contents  etc.  as  in  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  16 — only  that  the  sectional  divisions  and  other  notes  taken 
over  into  MS.  Ar.  16  from  MS.  Ar.  4  are  not  seen  in  MS. 
Pocock.  219.  In  a  few  instances  a  remark  is  found  in  our 
manuscript  that  is  not  given  in  MS.  Ar.  16;  thus,  v.  g.,  at  the 
26  th  chapter  of  Leviticus  we  are  told  that  at  this  place  begins 
the  reading  for  New  Year's  day  (compare  MS.  B.  N.  Paris. 
Ar.  11,  in  Chap.  Ill,  5). 

Genesis,  as  has  been  said  already,  comprises  57  lections, 
Exodus  19,  Leviticus  13;  Numbers  is  divided  into  23  sections 
(J^>«a9)  and  Deuteronomy  shows  no  division  whatever. 

Paulus  in  his  "Commentatio  Critica"  (mentioned  above) 
p.  39  speaking  of  the  Arabic  versions  derived  from  the  Syriac 
of  the  London  Polyglot  mentions  five  Bodleian  MSS.  that  con- 
tain the  so-called  Arabic  "Catenae"  on  the  Pentateuch,  and 
says:  "Quintus  denique  signo  Pocock.  219  dignoscendus.  Habet 
et  hie  suum  j-y^-^-sa  seu  scholia  textui  intermixta,  sed  anonymi. 
Hypographeu  aut  aliud  indicium  historicum  non  inveni  in  Co- 
dice  nisi  hoc:  Ed.  Pocockium  ex  dono  Georgii  Cornewall 
mercatoris  codicem  possedisse.  Duos  posteriores  (i.  e.  Bodl. 
219  et  Pocock.  219)  apud  doct.  Urium  non  invenio  recensitos". 
Besides,  his  words  (p.  40):  "Tandem  cum  jam  diutius  Catenis 
his  Carshunicis  immoratus  fuissem"  etc.  seem  to  imply  that 
also  MS.  Pocock.  219  is  a  Cavshunic  MS.,  like  the  other  four 
MSS.  mentioned  by  him.  Evidently  the  learned  author,  who 
did  not  have  the  advantage  of  photographic  reproductions, 
must  have  mixed  up  the  notes  he  had  taken  in  the  Oxford 
Library;  for  MS.  Pocock.  219  is  clearly  no  "Carshuuic"  MS., 
and  it  is  distinctly  mentioned  by  Uei  in  his  catalogue  as 
Arab.  Ciirist.  IV,  p.  3n,  col.  1. 


86  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  BoiUeian  Library  at  Oxford 

We  may  also  note  in  this  connection,  that  E.  PrsET  in 
his  "Catalogi  Bodl.  Part.  II,  vol.  I"  p.  444  speaking  of  the 
Carshunic  codex  Bodl,  324,  makes  a  similar  mistake  when  he 
says:  "foliis  256  constans  duplici  columna  luculenter  descriptus"'. 
This  manuscript  which  we  also  had  photographed  for  our 
present  study  shows  no  sign  of  a  "douhle  column",  the  lines 
running  over  the  entire  page.  It  contains  a  lengthy  "catena" 
of  different  Fathers  and  writers  on  the  lections  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. (Gen.  has  65  sections.)  But  when  Pusey  says:  "Cum 
textu  biblico  hujus  Catenae  proxime  consentit  is,  qui  commen- 
tariis  Ephremi  illustratur  in  Bodl.  154  (Uei,  Syr.  XXVUI), 
Hunt.  112  (Uki,  Syr.  XXX),  Marsh.  440  (Uri,  Syr.  XXVI), 
Pocock.  219  (Uei,  Arab.  Christ.  IV)"— he  certainly  does  not 
quite  hit  the  mark.  As  to  the  close  similarity  of  the  Biblical 
text  in  these  MSS.,  we  do  not  wish  to  deny  that  there  is 
some  resemblance  between  the  texts  of  Pocock.  219  and  Bodl. 
;524,  although  there  are  a  very  large  number  of  important 
variant  readings;  neither  are  we  in  position  to  say  anything 
about  the  contents  of  Bodl.  154  and  Hunt.  112;  but  we  can- 
not admit  that  Pocock.  219  should  contain  the  commentary 
of  St.  Ephrem.  This  is  found  in  Marsh.  440  of  which  we 
shall  speak  in  the  next  paragraph;  but  the  j-^^^-^^  in  Pocock. 
219  differs  greatly  from  the  former;  in  fact,  it  does  not  amount 
to  one-fifth  of  the  commentary  given  in  the  Carshunic  MS. 
Marsh.  440. 

Moreover  Pusey  is  certainly  mistaken  when  he  proceeds 
(1.  c.) :  "Longius  recedunt,  sed  eandem  hand  dubie  versionem 
continent  Hunt.  1 86  (Uri,  Arab.  Christ.  IX),  Hunt.  424  (Uri, 
Arab.  Christ.  VIII),  Sekl.  66  (Uei,  Arab.  Christ.  VII)".  We 
cannot  say  anything  about  Hunt.  186  and  Seld.  66;  but  that 
Hunt.  424  contains  a  version  altogether  different  from  the  one 
found  in  Pocock.  219  (and  even  in  Bodl.  324),  may  be  seen 
by  any  one  who  compares  the  specimen  chapters  of  the  two 
versions  in  Part  II  of  our  work,  Sec.  I  and  Sec.  IV  respectively. 

As  to  the  statement  of  Paulus  (1.  c.  p.  36)  that  the  Arabic 
text    of  the    group  under  which  he  classes  Pocock.  219  is  a 


Part  I,  Chap.  IV  87 


translation  of  the  Syriac  version  found  in  the  Polyglot,  we 
may  remark  that  possibly  this  is  true  of  the  other  four  MSS. 
(see  above)  mentioned  by  him  in  this  connection.  But  if  they 
contain  the  same  text  as  Pocock.  219,  the  assertion  must  be 
modified  considerably.  For  the  Syriac  text  found  in  the  London 
Polyglot  is  the  same,  substantially,  as  that  of  the  Eastern 
Syriac  (Urmia  edition)  and  Western  Syriac  (Lee's  edition) 
Bible,  i.  e.  the  Peshitto  pure  and  simple,  translated  from  the 
Hebrew,  though  corrected  at  a  later  period  according  to  the 
Septuagint'.  This  correction  and  revision,  however,  docs  not 
go  far  as  regards  the  Pentateuch.  But  between  the  text  of 
the  Peshitto  and  that  found  in  MS.  Pocock.  219  there  are 
almost  a  dozen  more  or  less  important  differences  in  the  very 
first  chapter  of  Genesis  alone. 

3)  Bodl.  Libr.  Marsh.  440  =  N. 

This  splendid  MS.  in  folio  has  just  been  mentioned  in 
speaking  of  MS.  Pocock.  219.  It  is  a  Carshunic  MS.  of  370 
pages  containing  Genesis  and  Exodus  with  an  extensive  and 
highly  interesting  commentary.  •  The  manuscript  is  of  rather 
recent  date,  1799  of  the  Greeks,  1487  A.  D.,  and  was  written 
in  the  renowned  monastery  of  Kannubin  in  Syria.  It  is 
divided  into  two  volumes  of  almost  equal  size,  so  that  Genesis 
ending  on  fol.  214''  runs  partly  into  the  second  volume. 

We  have  taken  account  of  this  MS.,  because  it  represents 
substantially  the  same  Arabic  text  as  MvSS.  Pocock.  219,  B. 
N.  Ar.  16  etc.,  as  may  be  seen  from  our  collation  of  texts 
(Part  II,  Sec  I).  Moreover,  in  Genesis  the  number  of  lections 
and  the  liturgical  indications  agree  almost  entirely  with  those 
marked  on  the  other  MSS.  of  this  group  2.  The  spelling  of 
the  proper  names  is  decidedly  Syriac.    European  numerals  in 

'  DovAt,,  R.,  La  Litterature  Syriaque,  3.  edit.,  Paris  195)7,  p.  33  sqri. 

2  Exodus,  according  to  Uri,  is  divided  into  30  lections  for  the  feasts 
of  Oui-  Lord,  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  the  Apostles.  We  have  not  been 
able  to  verify  this  statement,  which  would  point  to  an  important  dift'erence 
between  this  1\LS.  and  Ar.  16  etc.  (E.'c.  19  lections). 


88  The  A  rahic  MSS.  of  the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford 

the  upper  left  corner  count  the  pages.  The  quires  are  numbered 
in  Syriac  letters  (at  the  bottom  of  the  page)  at  the  beginning 
and  end  of  each  quinion. 

Fol.  3*  Genesis  begins  with  the  invocation  of  tlie  Trinity: 

l^o    v^oa&    vaxo    ^    cK^oJII    «li-a^^    nlioK.^    ^l-firol     ">'«•■    ^    '^ojll    ,«"»» 

>^i<;^  ^po  yiLaja^  >>Ojiiiv  Vol  ^  opla^  v«j1.J)I  yo-.  After  this  ex- 
clamation in  Syriac:  "Lord,  have  mercy  on  me",  there  follow 
the  first  two  verses  of  Genesis,  and  then  v*mBt:Sk.  Fol.  A^' 
2d  col.,  the  text  is  taken  up  again  with  the  word  oIKai^..  Two 
verses  only  from  Sciipture  are  quoted,  followed  by  a  long 
„tafsir'',  and  in  this  way  text  and  commentary  alternate 
throughout  the  manuscript. 

Fol.  2^'  seems  to  have  afforded  different  readers  an  occasion 
to  indulge  their  fancy.  On  top  we  read:  IIoi'Tax)^  ri]v  dXriOuav. 
Then  follow  some  illegible  Hues  in  Syriac  characters.  The 
upper  and  lower  outer  corners  were  utilized  for  Arabic  notes 
and  phrases;  five  or  six  lines  of  Syriac  are  enclosed  in  an 
irregular  quadrangular  frame,  aside  of  which  four  small  circles 
are  painted;  below  to  the  rigiit  there  is  a  long  Arabic  note 
of  twelve  half-lines,  and  to  the  left  another  reader  has  trans- 
literated into  Arabic  characters  the  introduction  of  the  Can- 
shunic  text  on  the  next  page  ( J\  \^J^\  (b-»«o)  quoted  above. 

Marginal  notes  are  rare.  There  is  a  Syriac  philosophical 
remark  on  fol.  35^  an  indication  of  contents  in  Syriac  on 
fol.  36",  and  an  Arabic  note  on  fol.  43''  stating:  ^\  JUb,^ 
*-^  <_s*  f^'  ("0  verb)  U,-^  ,^\  'ijS.-^^\  "It  is  said  that  the 
tree  from  which  Adam  [ate]  was  a  fig-tree". 

The  Carshunic  colophon  to  Genesis,  fol.  214^  furnishes  us 
this  interesting  information:  "Know,  0  Father,  that  the  Book 
of  Exodus  was  (written)  before  the  Book  of  Genesis;  but 
Moses  commanded  Joshua,  the  son  of  Xun,  to  write  it  (Genesis) 
before  the  Book  of  Exodus,  for  the  reason  tliat  the  account 
(given  in  Genesis)  was  one  that  jjreceded  (that  given  in  Exodus). 
And   thus  Moses   put   the   Book  of  Genesis  first;  but  Moses 


Part  I,  Chap.  IV  89 


learned    (by   revelation)   the  Book  of  Genesis   only   after  the 
Book  of  Exodus.     And  the  power  is  with  God''. 

There  follows  in  three  lines  a  prayer  in  Syriac,  which  we 
may  aptly  quote  here: 

.^«jel    ^viNsN    ^^Av    I<:»VS.t    aio^^i    .sioKftl,    ,^»i.^a    .J.b.aM,«Xe 

"With  the  eternal  possessions  gladden,  0  God,  Thy  servant 
Joseph  who  wrote  and  arranged  (this  book)  according  to  his 
ability,  and  the  owner  and  the  reader  and  the  hearer  and 
everyone  who  takes  part  (in  the  book).  The  mercy  of  God 
be  upon  us  forever.     Amen". 

4)  Bod).  Libr.  Hunt.  424  =  X. 

Of  this  quarto  MS.  (408  pages)  of  the  Arabic  Pentateuch 
we  have  had  occasion  to  say  a  few  words  when  treating  of 
MS.  Pocock.  219  (2d  paragraph  of  this  chapter).  Paulus  in 
his  "Commentatio  Critica"  speaks  of  it  in  two  places:  when 
dealing  with  the  Arabic  versions  derived  from  the  Syriac 
(page  46  and  page  .50,  where  he  gives  a  specimen  of  Gen.  49, 
3 — 27,  also  p.  .55),  and  again  when  treating  of  those  that 
represent  the  Septuagint  text  (p.  58  and  p.  62 — specimen  of 
Gen.  1, 1—5) '. 

This  is  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  first  and  last  part  of 
this  manuscript  (Gen.  1,1—5,  10  and  Deut.  32,43—34,  12) 
present  a  version  made  from  the  Septuagint,  whereas  the  bulk 
of  the  volume  follows,  though  rather  loosely,  the  Hebrew  text. 

Uki  guided  by  tlie  title:  ^\^^m}\  ^^  i.».i>.-X«  'i\j^i\  ^_ilXS 
^i^l  ^J,\  states  that  the  MS.  represents  a  version  made 
from  the  Hebrew.  Yet  he  notices  the  fact  that  the  first  ten 
and  the  last  six  pages  are  of  parchment,  whilst  the  rest  of 
the   volume   is   papei-.    As  far  as  we  can  see  from  our  roto- 

'  To  the  words  j~k^3R-0a  j^  of  his  text  Paulus  remarks  in  a  foot- 
note: Jasx-l^?  sine  pulcritudine,  an  vero  ^^i^X*  .  —  Here  both  the  text 
given  by  Paulus  and  the  emendation  proposed  by  him  are  out  af  place, 
for  the  MS.  distinctly  writes:  A-vJuOo  j-^j  <)Lt^O-<i    _-^. 


90  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Boilleian  Library  at  Oxford 

graphs,  the  old  part  of  the  manuscript  begins  on  fol.  15  with 
Gen.  5,11.  AVhether  the  first  page  of  the  manuscript  as  now 
extant  is  numbered  fol.  5,  or  whether,  instead  of  ten,  Uia  should 
have  said  fourteen  pages  are  parchment,  we  cannot  decide  at 
present  The  fact  is  that  Genesis  begins  on  fol.  7"  with  the 
introduction:    <)o.    ^j^^,-wJl    ,J\M1    ^jJ^"^'    j^i^\yi    <UJl    (.--o 

.LJ>xJ\    ^^    ,i_w    »*^   AJL-Jji-I    ^k^    J'"^'    ,i-.^l  ^li-»;l    il^—^ 

We  need  not  give  specimens  of  the  text  here,  because 
eight  chapters  (1  —  6,  18  and  50)  are  found  complete  in  the 
second  part  of  our  work.  Sec.  IV.  We  have  there  tried  to 
make  the  text  readable;  the  oftentimes  unintelligible  "readings" 
of  the  MS.  we  have  put  in  the  notes  below  the  text. 

There  is  no  trace  of  old  foliation,  nor  are  the  quires 
numbered.     Genesis  ends  (fol.  IDS")  with  the  colophon:    J^^ 

.(.sic)  «Xv^l  i-J^ 
And   below  we   read:   ,^\S  i_i— jy.  ^\  ^^J!LLJ\  ,_^»jl>  ^i^ 

^ISj    <*v.^-lj     ....a.*     u^  ^    ijjfc  \j    d<X,ui     ».*a.«    C^r"^     J-*^     ^^  ^     '^~^^. 

"Some  of  the  commentators  state,  that  the  coffin  of  Joseph 
used  to  be  taken  by  turns  one  year  to  the  Eastern  the  next 
to  the  Western  people  of  Egypt,  and  there  was  abundance 
and  blessing  wherever  it  was". 

This  note  may  perhaps  lend  color  to  the  opinion  that  ours 
is  an  Egyptian  manuscript;  but  we  do  not  wish  to  urge  this 
point  much.  In  fact  we  know  nothing  of  the  origin  ("pro- 
venance") of  the  MS.  We  feel  justified,  however,  in  giving 
extracts  from  this  version  in  our  dissertation,  because  the  first 
and  last  part  of  the  MS.  represent  the  Septuagint  recension 
though  differing  considerably  in  style  from  the  other  (Septu- 
agint) texts  mentioned  by  us,  even  if  one  does  not  care  to 
indorse  the  opinion  of  Padlu.s  (1.  c.  p.  63):  "Indolem  spirat 
hoc  specimen  (hujus  scil.  versionis)  non  vulgarem."  Besides, 
as   we    remarked  before  (Chap,  IV,  2),    Pusey  holds   that   our 


Parti,  Chap.  IV  91 


version  greatly  resembles  the  text  of  Pocock.  219  (and  its 
group),  edited  by  us  in  Part  II,  Sec.  I.  And  as  we  have 
claimed  that  this  opinion  is  untenable,  whether  we  refer  it  to 
the  old  or  to  the  new  part  of  the  manuscript,  it  is  proper 
that  we  give  the  corresponding  chapters  of  this  version  also, 
so  that  the  reader  may  judge  for  himself  as  to  the  incorrect- 
ness of  the  statement. 

The  more  recent  part  of  the  MS.  ends  on  fol.  \^^  with 
the  indication  of  the  first  two  words  of  the  following  page 
*.J  jJ^j  below  which  the  scribe  put  the  significant  rubric  ^, 
"it  is  correct".  We  notice  in  this  first  part  at  Gen.  1,14 
(fol.  7'0  and  Gen.  1,23  (fol.  8'')  the  words  Aill  Li,^  written  in 
red  ink.  The  words  are  redundant,  for  in  both  cases  there 
follows  the  ordinary  expression:  ^JUl  Jli"^.  There  is  likewise 
a  whole  superfluous  phrase  on  fol.  IT'  (Gen.  3, 8)  written  in 
red:  ^jijj  ^^>ja\\  J,  (sic)  JU  dOJl  Cj^,^  L«.,^.«j  P',  for  im- 
mediately after  the  ordinary  text  begins.  Several  other  words 
or  parts  of  sentences  are  also  written  in  red  (Gen.  2,8;  2,23; 
3,23;  4,25),  but  in  these  cases  the  words  belong  to  the  text. 
When  the  scribe  reached  the  end  of  the  fourth  chapter, 
fol.  13'',  he  noticed  that  he  would  have  about  one  page  too 
much  space;  so  he  wrote  the  remaining  first  ten  verses  of  the 
fifth  chapter  in  distended  letters  and  in  lines  wide  apart  (eight 
on  a  page),  so  that  the  text  might  cover  the  next  two  pages 
of  the  MS. 

If  in  the  first  part  of  the  MS.  the  writing  is  very  plain 
and  distinct;  in  the  second  it  is  very  often  almost  illegible. 
The  scribe  was  certainly  most  careless  with  regard  to  pointing 
and  also  with  regard  to  the  consonantal  text  itself.  Omissions 
and  repetitions  of  letters  and  words,  sometimes  even  entire 
sections  put  iu  the  wrong  place  (v.  g.  fol.  31''  between  Gen.  17, 21 
and  17, 22  there  are  about  five  lines  of  text  belonging  to  chapter 
18,12  —  15,  where,  however,  they  are  again  properly  placed) 
are  nothing  extraordinary  in  this  portion  of  our  MS. 

As  the  chronology  of  the  Patriarchs  in  Chap.  V  (besides 
other  distinguishing  traits)  shows,  the  new  part  represents  the 


92  The  Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford 

Septuagint  version.  The  first  page  (fol.  15")  of  the  old  part, 
on  the  contrary,  reveals  the  fact,  borne  out  by  further  com- 
parison, that  we  have  to  do  with  a  translation  made  from  the 
Hebrew.  For  from  verse  11  the  chronology  agrees  with  the. 
Hebrew,  save  that  in  the  case  of  Henoch  and  Methusala  their 
years  are  wrongly  set  down  as  ;t65  and  960  respectively, 
whereas  the  sum  of  the  years  assigned  to  them  before  and 
after  the  birth  of  their  first-born  is  905  and  969  respectively 
(the  ordinary  Hebrew  computation). 

The  new  part  has  no  sections  or  headlines  whatever;  the 
old  part  at  times  shows  an  indication  of  contents  written  in 
large  characters,  v.  g.  ^'J^l  i-^  (Gen.  G,  14),  f^^-^  *-^" 
(Gen.  18, 16),  U^^,  i^LJ  (Gen.  50, 24). 

Of  this  version  we  may  say  with  PAULrs  (1.  c.  p.  55)  that 
it  frequently  inserts  glosses,  gives  fitting  explanations  and  cir- 
cumlocutions, and  does  not  follow  the  Syriac  version  literally. 
To  which  we  may  add,  that  it  is  certainly  not  a  literal  trans- 
lation of  the  Hebrew  either,  but  very  often  a  loose  paraphrase 
only,  lengthening  or  shortening  even  the  narration,  so  long  as 
the  main  facts  are  preserved.  At  times  rather  odd  "exegetical" 
interpretations  are  freely  interwoven  with  the  inspired  text. 
In  this  way  we  explain,  for  instance,  the  remarkable  story 
introducing  the  account  of  the  flood  (Gen.  6, 1 — 4;  for  the 
text  see  Part  II,  Sec.  IV),  how  the  sons  of  Seth  living  on  the 
summit  of  the  mountain  saw  the  daughters  of  Kabil  (sic), 
which  is  (?)  the  lowest  part  of  Mt.  Anhar  (?),  went  in  unto 
them  and  thus  begot  the  race  of  giants,  "the  mighty  men  of 
old,  men  of  renown". 

As  an  historical  curiosity  we  transcribe  here  the  end  of 
the  introduction  of  this  MS.  After  speaking  of  the  excellency 
of  the  Law  promulgated  by  Moses  and  delivered  to  the  Jewish 
people,  handed  down  from  generation  to  generation  through 
the  prophets,  doctors  and  high-priests,  (the  "chain"  of  tradition 
is  linked  very  carefully,  the  name  of  the  judge,  high-priest  or 
doctor  who  was  the  chosen  custodian  of  the  Law  is  given  and 
likewise   the   name   of  him    to   whom   the  former,   before  his 


Part  1,  Chap.  IV  93 


demise,  intrusted  the  Holy  Books— 66  persons,  we  think,  fi-om 
Moses  to  Caiphas),  the  writer  speaks  of  the  siege  and  capture 
of  Jerusalem  under  Titus  (70  A.  D.),  of  the  atrocities  com- 
mitted by  the  conquerors,  who  led  large  numbers  of  the  people 
captive  from  Jerusalem,  the  Holy  City,  unto  Rome'.  Then 
he  continues  (fol.  6^):  "It  is  related  of  him  (Titus)  that  he 
fed  the  lions  and  the  wild  beasts  with  them,  whilst  those  who 
were  with  him  gazed  with  pleasure  upon  them,  and  that  he 
used  them  as  bait  for  the  wild  animals— 80000  men  out  of 
the  total  number  of  the  captives. 

Now  Solomon,  the  son  of  David,  had  built  a  city  difficult 
of  access  as  an  arsenal  for  his  possessions  (a  treasury)  whose 
name  was  Batir,  which,  it  is  said,  is  now  called  Balbek. 
Titus  could  not  take  this  (city).  The  priests,  therefore,  con- 
veyed the  (books  of  the)  Law  thereto  and  entrusted  the  same 
to  Samayah  and  Abtalyah,  the  magistrates  of  the  city  of 
Batir. 

But  then  after  a  long  time  Hadrian  the  King  (Emperor 
Hadrian,  117—138  A.  D.)  besieged  Batir  and  forced  it  to 
open  its  gates  to.  him.  Then  the  chiefs  of  the  descendants  of 
David  took  the  Law  and  went  to  Bagdad,  and  they  are  living 
in  Bagdad  unto  this  day. 

And  when  the  Jews  were  dispersed  into  the  lands,  the  sons 
of  David  made  copies  of  it  (the  Law),  and  sent  them  to  every 
band  (of  the  Jews). 

But  the  High-priests  Annas  and  Caiphas  had  agreed,  be- 
fore the  captivity  of  Titus,  to  subtract  1000  years  from  the 
history  of  the  lives  of  the  Patriarchs,  in  order  to  deny  the 
apparition  of  the  Messias,  and  they  told  the  Jews  that  the 
time  in  which  the  Messias  woidd  appear  was  not  yet  complete. 
And  they  (the  Jews)  remain  in  their  error  even  to  this  our 
day." 


'  For  the  Arabic  text  see  Appendix  II. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE    EEMAINING    MANUSCRIPTS    AND    THE 
FEINTED  EDITIONS  CONSULTED  AND  COLLAT- 
ED IN  TH[S  STUDY 

1)  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  =  S. 

This  ^rS.  of  268  folio  pages  which  contains  the  entire 
Pentateuch  in  Arabic,  is  assigned  by  Assemani  to  the  14th 
century  (Script.  Vet.  IV,  part.  2,  p.  2).  It  was  once  cod.  XI 
orient,  of  the  collection  of  the  celebrated  Peter  a  Valle,  as 
is  still  shown  on  fol.  2''  (original  Copto-Arabic  foliation),  the 
page  preceding  the  text.  This  begins  fol.  1"  of  the  modern 
numeration  (Copto-Arabic  3")  abruptly  with  the  heading 
J^'ill  ,J-.aiJ\.  There  are  fifteen  lines  on  the  page,  the  hand- 
writing is  large  and  on  the  whole  very  distinct.  Marginal 
notes  arc  rare  indeed.  Fol.  23  '  (Gen.  18,  28j  there  is  added 
on  the  margin  j^wcjo^\5  to  the  i*.^»i\  of  the  text  ('"wilt  Thou 
destroy  the  whole  city  for  the  sake  of  forty-five?",  instead  ot 
"five"  as  the  Hebrew  text  says).  As  a  rule  these  words  on 
the  margin  are  nothing  else  than  a  supplying  of  a  word  or 
phrase  omitted  in  the  text.  Fol.  9"  (Copto-Arabic  11°)  we 
notice  indication  of  the  quire:  ^Lill  ^\^\. 

We  had  this  codex  photographed  being  prompted  by  the 
notice  of  Assemani  (1.  c):  "Pentateuchus  ]Mosis,  versionis 
aegyptiacae  seu  alexandrinae,  quae  ex  graeca  twv  LXX  inter- 
pretttm  editione  concinnata  est."  But  "dormitat  alii]uando  et 
bonus  Homerus".  The  version  of  MS.  Vatic.  Ar.  2  is  in  no 
wise  made  from  the  Greek,  but  literally  from  I  he  Hebrew. 
All  the  distinguishing  features — omissions,  additions,  differences 
in  names  and  in  the  years  of  the  Patriarchs  etc. — clearly  show 


Fart  1,  Chap.  V  95 


that  this  is  a  Hebrew- Arabic  version. '  In  fact  it  is  one  of  the 
most  literal  Araljic  versions  from  the  Hebrew  we  know  of. 

It  agrees  verbatim  with  the  text  in  P.  Kahle's  „Die 
Arabischen  Bibeltibersetzungen"  (Leipzig  1904)  V,  p.  13 — 23, 
edited  from  Florent.  Cod.  Palat.  orient.  112  (XXI),  where  it 
is  called  in  the  superscription  "Saadias'  version"  (see  Kahle, 
1.  c.  p.  VIII  note  2).  In  Part  II  Sect.  Ill  of  this  dissertation 
eight  chapters  of  Genesis  from  the  Vatican  MS  will  be  found. 
For  the  first  four  chapters  edited  by  Kahle  we  give  the 
variants,  slight  ones  indeed,  of  the  Florentine  MS.  (according 
to  Kahle's  printed  text)  below  our  text.  We  have  designated 
these  variants  by  "V".  In  the  notes  attention  is  called  to  a 
few  omissions,  vulgar  forms  and  other  peculiarities  of  the  text. 

Since  the  Paris  (and  London)  Polyglot  text  of  the  Arabic 
Pentateuch  is  taken  from  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  1,  and  is  generally 
admitted  to  be  Saadias'  translation,  we  give  in  Chap.  L  of 
Genesis  (Part  II,  Sect.  Ill)  the  variants  of  the  London  Poly- 
glot from  our  Vatic.  MS.  These  variants  of  "Walton's 
Polyglot"  are  designated  in  the  notes  below  the  text  by  the 
abbreviation  "W".  The  writer  regrets  to  say  that  he  did  not 
have  the  text  of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  1  itself  at  his  disposal  for  the 
collation  of  the  "Saadias'  version" i. 

We  have  taken  MS.  Vatic.  Ar.  2  into  account  in  our  Study 
and  have  even  edited  some  chapters  of  it,  partly  because  the 
misleading  error  of  Assemani  had  to  be  corrected,  but  yet 
more  because  this  version  was,  it  seems  to  us,  used  by  the 
Christian  Church  of  Egypt,  not  indeed  as  the  officially  recog- 
nized text — for  this  was  a  version  from  the  Septuagint— but 
for  comparison,  corrections,  divisions  etc. 


>  Compare  in  this  conuection  our  remarks  on  the  version  found  in 
JVI8.  B.  N.  Ar.  4,  Chap.  Ill,  2;  see  also  "Introduction",  page  12,  note  1. 
J.  Dbrenbourq,  Version  Arabe  du  Pentateuque  de  Saadia  ben  Josef  Al- 
Fayyumi,  Paris  1893,  published  "Saadias"'  Arabic  translation  in  Hebrew 
characters  from  a  Yemen  MS.  and  the  Constantinople  and  London  Poly- 
glots, taking  no  account  of  the  Florentine  MS.  (and  Leyden  Cod.  i}77 
Warner,  published  by  de  Lauabde,  Materialien  I),  much  less  of  MS.  Vatic. 
Ar.  2. 


96  The  remaining  Manuscripts  and  the  printed  Editions  etc. 

Thus  there  are  a  large  number  of  variants,  especially  in 
MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  and  its  group,  and  also  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16 
and  its  likes,  marked  as  "Arabic"  (^J^/■  or  simply  ^),  or  even 
without  such  a  title,  which  poiiit  to  our  translation.  For  it 
is  not  in  sense  only  but  often  in  the  very  word  that  these 
variants  agree  with  the  Hebrew-Arabic  version  found  in  MS. 
Vatic.  Ar.  2. 

Again,  there  can  be  no  doubt  (we  hinted  at  this  in  Chap.  11,1 : 
MS.  A)  that  the  sections  or  chapters  (J^-aj)  marked  in  MS. 
Vatic.  Copt.  1  (frtim  whence  they  passed  into  MS.  B.  N.  Ai-.  12) 
are  taken  from  tliis  Hebrew-Arabic  text.  Thus  in  our  MS. 
Genesis  has  47  sections,  which  agree  to  the  word  with  the 
division  marks  in  the  margin  of  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  (compare 
oui-  remark  on  the  eighth  section,  Chap.  II,  1).  Exodus  like- 
wise has  26  sections,  Leviticus  16-,  Numbers  35  and  Deuter- 
onomy 18.- 

We  are  inclined  to  believe  that  in  this  division  of  the 
Pentateuch  into  142  sections  we  have  before  us  a  division 
similar  in  character  and  purpose  to  that  of  the  Sedarim  or 
triennial  pericopes  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  For,  if  in  Hebrew 
MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch  these  sections  vary  in  number  from 
154  to  167,  according  to  the  exhaustive  study  of  GiNSBrEG 
(Introduction  to  the  Hebrew  Bible,  London  1897,  p.  32  sqq.), 
we  may,  perhaps,  also  reasonably  suppose  that  the  Jews  of 
Egj'pt,  who  were  forced  to  accommodate  themselves  in  regard 
to   feast   days  and   religious   observances   in   general   to   the 


2  AssEUANi  gives  15  sections  for  Leviticus;  but  we  think  there  is  a 
mistake  ou  his  part  For,  when  giving  the  complete  number  of  sections 
from  the  colophon,  he  assigns  the  number  132.  But  if  we  add  the  number 
of  sections  of  the  single  books,  we  find  141.  We  may,  therefore,  well 
suppose  an  error  on  the  part  of  the  scribe  or  the  reader,  since  it  should 
either  have  been  written  or  read  142  (not  132).  And  this  difference  of 
one  between  the  actual  number  of  sections  and  that  assigned  (most 
probably)  in  the  colophon,  allows  us  to  add  one  section  to  Leviticus, 
making  the  total  number  of  sections  in  this  book  16  instead  of  15.  We 
are  confirmed  in  this  opinion  on  finding  16  sect,  in  Levit.  in  MSS.  Vat. 
Copt.  1  and  B.  N.  Ar.  12. 


Part  I,  Chap.  Y  97 


Mohammedan  masters  of  the  country,  as  we  know  from 
Makrizi's  History  and  other  sources,  may  have  found  it  ne- 
cessary to  reduce  the  number  of  sections  by  twelve,  making 
four  lections  less  for  each  year,  so  as  to  be  able  to  read 
tlie  whole  Pentateuch  within  three  years.  This  opinion  derives 
additional  probability  from  the  fact  that  in  our  MS.  Vatic. 
Ar.  2  fol.  8  (Copto- Arabic  10)  we  find  this  title  at  Genesis  6,9: 
^..JLiJl  iJil^iJI  Jjl  _j«,^  cj^'-^'  J-«^l,  "the  eighth  Section, 
which  is  the  beginning  of  the  second  Parashah". 

2)  Printed  editions  cosulted  and  collated. 

A.  In  Sect.  II  of  the  second  part  of  our  Study  we  have 
collated  for  the  first,  eighteenth  and  fiftieth  chapter  of  Genesis 
the  Arabic  text  as  it  appears  in  the  Euchologium  of  the  Coptic 
Church,  published  by  Raphael  Tuki  in  three  books,  Rome,  Pro- 
paganda, 1736  and  1761 — 62.  These  three  books  are  generally 
referred  to  as  the  "Missale  Copto-Arabice" — "Pontificale  Copto- 
Arabice"  (2  vols.) — "Rituale  Copto-Arabice" i. 

GuiDi  cited  by  Hoener  (Consecration  of  Church  and  Altar, 
p.  V— see  below,  B)  is  authority  for  the  statement  that  Tuki's 
MS.  is  lost.  It  is  impossible,  therfore,  to  say  from  which 
ancient  sources  this  Coptic  bishop  drew  for  his  publication. 
Certain  it  is,  that  the  Arabic  text  found  in  his  bilingual  litur- 
gical books  belongs  to  the  group  represented  by  MS.  Vatic. 
Copt.  1,  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  12  etc.  The  version  is,  in  our  opinion, 
made  directly  from  the  Coptic,  but  Tuki  has  endeavored  in 
numerous  places  to  revise  his  Copto-Arabic  text  upon  the 
Greek  of  the  Septuagint. — Tuki's  variants  we  designate  by  "T". 

As  the  Copto-Arabic  Missal,  Pontifical  and  Ritual  are  not 
furnished  with  comprehensive  indexes,  it  may  facilitate  inquiry 
if  we  here  give  a  complete  list  of  all  the  parts  of  the  Penta- 
teuch that  occur  in  the  Euchologium  2. 

1  See  H.  Hyvernat,  Egypt-Coptic  Church,  in  the  Catholic  Encyclo- 
pedia, vol.  V,  p.  361. 

2  In  the  Missal  we  have  found  only  four  Scriptural  passages,  viz. 
Mt.  26, 26— 29  (p.  THA),  I  Cor.  11,  23— 27  (p.  TUI'),  Psalm  22,  6  (p.  TllAi, 
Psalm  116, 1.  2  (p.  IV  in  the  Anaphora). 

Rhodb,  Araljic  Feutateucli  in  the  Churcb  uf  Egypt.  7 


98  The  remaining  Manuscripts  and  the  printed  Editions  etc. 


Gen.     1.  1—2,  3  Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  505. 
„        18,  1—23  "Lakane"  (Mandatum) 

Pontif.  vol.  II  p.  280. 
23,  1—24,  1         Woman  dying  in  Holy  Week 

Ritual  p.  541. 
.,        25,  7 — 11  Mourning  over  a  Bishop 

Ritual  p.  313. 
„       28,  10—22  Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  512. 
„        28,  10—22  Over  the  Baptismal  Font 

Pontif.  vol.  II  p.  200. 
„        50,  4 — 25  Man  dying  in  Holy  Week 

Ritual  p.  534. 
Exod.  14'  "Lakane"  (Mandatum) 

Pontif.  vol.  II  p.  286. 
„       l.i,  17—30  "Lakane"  on  the  Feast  of  St.  Peter 

and  St.  Paul     Pontif.  vol.  II  p.  417. 
25,  1 — 26,  30       Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  515. 
„       30,  22 — 33  Consecration  of  "Myron"  on  Holy 

Thursday  Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  289. 

„       30,  17 — 31,  11     Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  526. 
„       39,  43—40,  33"  Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  530. 
„       40,  33''— 38         Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  1  p.  536. 
Num.   4,  1 — 16  Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  536. 
„       4,  17—32  Consecration  of  Church 

Pontif.  vol.  I  p.  541. 
„       20,  22''— 29         Priest  dying  in  Holy  Week 

Ritual  p.  525. 

'  This  does  uot  seem  to  be  a  iSoriptiual  text. 


I'ari  I,  Chap.   V.  99 


Deut.  5,  22—6,  3  Feast  of  the  Adoration  of  the  Holy 

Cross  Pontif.  vol.  II  p.  332. 

16,  1—18  Feast  of  the  Adoration  of  the  Holy 

Cross  Pontif  vol.  II  p.  375. 

„       31,  14 — 16"         Mourning  over  a  Bishop 

Ritual  p.  ;]17. 
„       32,  39 — 4i  Mourning  over  a  Bishop 

Ritual  p.  311. 
„       32, 48—52  Mourning  over  a  Bishop 

Ritual  p.  310. 
B.  The  Rev.  G.  Hoener  edited  in  1902  (London)  the  „Ser- 
vice  for  the  Consecration  of  a  Church  and  Altar  according  to 
the  Coptic  Rite".  The  text  is  published  from  an  old  MS. 
(1024  A.  M.  =  1307  A.  D.)  presented  by  the  Coptic  Patriarch 
Kyrillos  of  Cairo  to  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  in  1898  (see  his 
Introduction,  pp.  V — X). 

In  tliis  Service  occur  a  large  number  of  readings  from  Holy 
Scripture,  both  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament.  Apart 
from  single  verses  interspersed  here  and  there  in  the  ritual 
text,  there  are  consecutive  lections  from  the  Pentateuch  as 
follows : 

Gen.     1,  1—2,  3  p.  81-92 

„        28,  10—22  p.  92—97 

Exod.  25,  1—26,  30  p.  97—119 

„  30,  17—31,  11  p.  119-128 
„  39,  43—40, 33  p.  128—135 
„       40,  33 -.38  p.  136-137 

Num.   4,  1—16  p.  137—145 

„       4,  17—32  p.  145—150 

We  have  collated  this  text  in  Sec.  II  of  the  second  Part 
of  our  Study  for  the  first  lection  from  Genesis  (1,  1 — 2,  3). 
The  variants  are  indicated  by  the  letter  "R". 


(^HAPTEK  VI. 

GROUPING  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS.     THEIR 

MUTUAL  RELATION 

Having  described  the  single  manuscripts  which  form  the 
subject  of  our  Study  and  pointed  out  the  peculiarities  of  each 
one  of  them,  we  may  now  classify  them  according  to  the  nature 
of  the  version  .they  represent. 

MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  324  aud  MS.  B.  X.  Ar.  4  may  be  passed 
over  here  without  impropriety.  We  have  dealt  with  them 
sufficiently  in  Chap.  IV,  2  aud  Chap.  Ill,  2  respectively.  The 
peculiar  text  of  the  former  entered  into  our  discussion  merely 
incidentally,  whilst  the  version  found  in  the  latter  is  certainly 
not  a  "version  of  the  Pentateuch  (made  or  used  officially)  in 
the  Church  of  Egypt".  Of  MS.  B.  X.  Ar.  4.  however,  we  shall 
catalogue  the  sections  of  the  text,  because  these  have  been 
copied  into  MS.  B.  X.  Ar.  16  (see  next  chapter). 

MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  (S)  contains  an  Arabic  version  from 
the  Hebrew,  as  was  said  above  (Cliap.  V,  1).  For  reasons 
there  stated  we  have  deemed  it  advisable  to  edit  a  number  of 
chapters  from  this  MS.  in    Sect.  Ill  of  Part  II  of  our  work. 

Of  MS.  Bod).  Libr.  Hunt.  424  (X),  the  old  and  new  portions 
of  which  represent  two  ditierent  versions,  we  also  publish  a 
number  of  chapters  (Part  II,  Sect.  IV)  for  the  reasons  set 
forth  in  treating  of  this  MS.  (Chap.  IV.  4)  and  of  MS.  Bodl. 
Libr.  Pocock.  219  (Chap.  IV,  2). 

The  other  fourteen  manuscripts,  with  which  we  are  chiefly 
concerned,  may  be  conveniently  divided  into  two  main  groups. 

The  first  group  comprises  seven  manuscripts,  viz.: 
MS.  B.  X.  Paris.  Ar.  16  =  H 
MS.  Bodl.  Libr.   Pocock.  219  =  K 


Part  I,  Chap  VI  101 


MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  9  =  L 

MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  10  =  M 

MS.  Bodl.  Libr.    Marsh.  440  =  N 

MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  II  =  O 

MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  18  =  P 
The  second  group  consists  liiiewise  of  seven  manuscripts,  viz.: 

MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.   1  =  A 

MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  2  =  B 

MS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1  =  C 

MS.  Bodl.    Libr.  Hunt.  33  =  D 

MS.  Bodl.    Libr.  Laud.  or.  272  =  E 

MS.  B.   N.  Paris.  Ar.  12  =  F 

MS.  British  Museum  or.  422  =  G 
As  already  stated,  tliis  classification  is  based  simply  on  the 
nature  of  the  version  found  on  the  several  manuscripts.  We 
refer  the  reader  to  our  text  edition,  Part  II,  Sect.  1  and  Sect.  II, 
respectively,  where  the  identity  of  the  version  contained  in  the 
different  manuscripts  of  each  group  becomes  quite  apparent. 
We  have  there  tried  to  establish  a  normal  te.Kt  of  both 
groups  for  eight  chapters  of  Genesis,  viz.  Chaps.  I— VI,  XVIII 
and  L,  by  collating  the  seven  manuscripts,  correcting  evident 
mistakes  in  one  on  the  authority  of  the  others  and  thus  restor- 
ing as  far  as  possible  the  original  text  of  the  two  versions. 
The  variants  we  designate  by  the  abbreviation  chosen  (see  above, 
Chap.  II)  for  the  manuscript  in  which  they  are  found.  An 
Arabic  exponent  to  the  right  "of  the  capital  letter  denotes  a 
variant  not  found  in  the  main  text  of  the  manusci'ipt  but 
between  the  lines  and  on  the  margin. 

As  to  the  relation  which  exists  between  the  single  manu- 
scripts of  each  group,  we  have  already  said  something  when 
describing  the  manuscripts.  It  is  difficult  however,  to  say 
anything  definite  about  the  mutual  relation  of  the  manuscripts 
of  the  first  group.  Possibly  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  10  in  its  original 
state  may  have  been  the  copy  from  which  MS.  Pocock.  219 
was  transcribed.  For  not  only  is  the  text  and  the  "tafsir" 
of  the  two  MSS.  identical,  but  they  also  agree  perfectly  as  to 


102  Grouping  of  the  Manuscripts 


the  indication  of  the  lections,  the  marginal  notes  and  liturgical 
remarks.  MS.  B.  X.  Ar.  9  was,  perhaps,  copied  from  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  16  before  the  commentary  had  been  added  on  the  margin 
of  the  latter.  But  it  seems  more  probable  that  MSS.  B.  .N. 
Ar.  9  and  Ar.  16  are  two  distinct  copies  made  directly  from 
the  same  original  text.  Something  similar  is  most  likely  to 
be  said  of  the  origin  of  MSS.  B.N.  Ar.  10  and  Ar.  11.  MS- 
:\larsh.  440  and  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  18  may  both  have  drawn  from 
an  ancient  manuscript  containing  the  same  text  as  MS.  B.  N. 
Ar.  16  but  enriched  with  the  commentary  of  St.  Ephrem, 

In  the  second  group  a  careful  examinatian  of  the  texts 
and  variants  leads  us  the  recognize  three  distinct  classes  of 
MSS.,  viz.: 

1)  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  1  (A) 
B.  N.  Paris.  Ar.  12  (F) 
Bodl.  Libr.  Laud.  or.  272  (E) 

2)  Vatic.  Libr.  Copt.  2  ^B) 

3)  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1  (C) 
British  Museum  or.  422  (G) 
Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  3:5  (D) 

1)  When  treating  of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  12  (F)  we  made  the 
assertion  that  this  MS.  was  simply  a  copy  of  the  Arabic  text 
of  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  1  (A).  In  support  of  this  claim  we  may 
refer  in  general  to  our  text  edition,  where  it  is  shown  that 
the  two  MSS.  agree  perfectly,  not  only  as  to  the  text  proper, 
but  also  almost  invariably  as  to  marginal  and  interlinear 
variants. 

Moreover,  in  MS.  F  the  proper  names  of  towns,  rivers,  coun- 
tries, persons  (especially  in  Chaps.  V  and  X  of  Genesis)  are 
almost  always  written  in  Coptic  letters  above  the  Arabic  names. 
The  spelling  of  these  Coptic  words  is  identical  with  that  used 
in  the  Coptic  text  of  MS.  A.  In  the  latter  MS.  we  sometimes 
find  in  such  cases  the  Arabic  equivalent  on  the  margin  or 
between   the  lines  introduced  by  the  letter  JJ  (Coptic),  v.  g. 

Gen.  2,  11  ^^^ iib^l-  ^^S'  -^  drops  these  variants,  and  instead 


Part  I,  Chap.   VI  103 


writes   the  Coptic   equivalent   iu  Coptic   characters   over   the 
corresponding  Arabic  word. 

Again,  the  notes,  liturgical  and  critical,  of  MS.  F  are  almost 
literally  the  same  as  those  of  MS.  A.  It  happens  very  rarely 
that  MS.  F  adds  any  remark  of  its  own,  and  still  more  rarely 
does  MS.  F  omit  anything  that  is  found  in  the  margins  of 
MS.  A.  Furthermore,  MS.  F  at  times  puts  the  readings,  or 
rather  corrections,  which  MS.  A  has  in  the  margin  with  the 
significant  note  ^-^  ("correct"),  directly  into  the  text;  so  too  it 
not  unfrequently  inserts  into  the  text  itself  those  omissions 
which  A  had  supplied  in  the  margin;  v.  g.  Gen.  2,  9,  "the 
tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil",  MS.  A  writes  in  the 
margin  i.^^.^'  isjjix),  which  words  MS.  F  simply  adopts  in  the 
text.  Compare  also  Gen.  1,  22:  (^a^Jc;^.  Ou  the  other  hand 
it  happens  that  MS.  F  omits  a  word  or  two  which  are  found 
in  MS.  A;  v.  g.    Gen.  1,  25,  MS.  F    lacks    the   words:    ^'M^.i 

Another  strong  argument  for  our  contention  may  be  drawn 
from  the  fact  noted  above  (Chap.  II,  1  and  Chap.  Ill,  note  1), 
that  in  MS.  A  the  long  passage  Num.  28,  23—29,  5  is  lacking 
both  in  the  Coptic  and  in  the  Arabic,  witliout  any  notice  of 
the  omission  either  in  the  text  or  iu  the  margin ;  whereas  in 
MS.  F  the  same  mutilated  text  had  at  first  been  faithfully 
transcribed  without  any  misgiving,  the  deficiency  being  supplied 
later  on  tlie  margin  "according  to  the  Greek  and  the  Hebrew" 

or    J.^M1    ^J.s. 

Not  to  speak  of  the  identity  of  introductory  and  concluding 
phrases  of  the  l)ooks  of  the  Pentateuch  in  these  two  MSS.,  we 
shall  adduce  but  one  more  proof  to  show  that  MS.  F  must 
have  been  copied  from  MS.  A.  It  was  remarked  above 
(Chap.  II,  1)  that  the  headlines  indicating  the  sections,  J-^aiJl 
J^Ml  etc.  (47  iu  Gen.  etc.),  were  crowded  between  the  lines 
in  MS.  A  after  the  text  had  already  been  written.  MS.  F, 
however,  brings  these  section-marks  written  in  bold  characters 
in  a  separate  line,  and,  to  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the  correclness 


104  Grouping  of  the  Manuscripts 

of  our  conjecture,  section  8,  wrongly  placed  at  Gen.  6.  8  in 
the  Arabic  text  of  MS.  A  instead  of  Gen.  9,  is  indicated  in 
MS.  F  at  Gen.  6,  8  also.  Section  32  (Gen.  26,  1)  and  section  36 
(Gen.  32,  1)  which  are  not  marked  in  MS  A  are  likewise  not 
to  be  found  in  MS.  F,  where  on  account  of  the  prominence 
of  the  headlines  an  omission  in  the  consecutive  order  of  sections 
could  in  itself  have  been  detected  very  easily. 

The  text  of  MS.  Laud.  or.  272  (E)  seems  to  us  to  represent 
the  very  same  recension  as  MSS.  A  and  F;  most  likely  the 
version  was  copied  from  MS.  A,  or  from  the  original  whence 
the  Arabic  translation  in  the  margin  of  MS.  A  was  taken. 

2)  The  version  found  on  MS.  Vatic.  Copt.  2  (B),  though 
substantially  the  same  as  that  of  MSS.  A  and  F,  appears  to 
be  a  different  recension,  the  scribe  (or  the  translator?)  having 
endeavored  to  correct  the  Arabic  text  at  times  according  to 
the  Greek,  at  times  according  to  the  Coptic.  A  definite  con- 
clusion as  to  the  exact  nature  of  the  Arabic  text  of  MS.  B 
can  only  be  reached  after  a  thorough  investigation  of  the  origin 
of  the  variants  found  in  this  MS. 

3)  MSS.  B.  N.  Paris.  Copt.  1  (C),  British  Museum  or.  422 
(G)  and  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  33  (D)  are  alike  with  regard  to 
the  Coptic  as  well  as  the  Arabic  text.  MS.  D  may  have  been 
copied  directly  from  MS.  C  or  its  prototype,  as  was  said  above 
(Chap.  II,  -i).  But  it  is  more  likely  that  MS.  G  (copied  in 
all  probability  from  MS.  C  or  its  prototype)  is  the  original 
from  which  the  Huntington  MS.  (D)  was  transcribed.  A  few 
examples  from  the  text  of  the  two  MSS.  may  serve  to  corro- 
borate this  opinion.  In  Chap.  L  of  Genesis  the  word  "he  wept" 
is  spelled  in  two  different  ways  in  both  MSS..  ISj  in  verse  1, 
and  ^^  in  verse  3.  In  verse  4  of  the  same  chapter  MS.  D 
writes  Cj^^^^  >^"  instead  of  CjJ^j  j\.  This  mistake  is  readily 
explained  by  an  "error  of  the  eye",  because  in  MS.  G  the 
next  verse  begins  with  the  syllable  ^,  in  ^^\3S.  Mistakes 
in  the  text,  faulty  spellings,  omissions  and  the  like  are  identic- 
al in  MSS.  G  and  D.  Thus  in  Gen.  50.  18  both  write  ^lU^^ 
instead  of  ^_5^-j;  and  in  Gen.  50,  4   c: — iJo  L^  is  omitted  by 


Part  I,  Chap.  VI  105 


each.  At  this  place  MS.  G  refers  by  a  cross  (  +  )  to  the 
margin  where  a  correction  or  addition  must  have  been  placed; 
but  of  this  the  last  letters  only  O  and  perhaps  (?)  J=>  are  still 
distinguishable.  MS.  D,  however,  omits  this  correction  entirely, 
because  perhaps  the  writer  never  puts  any  variants  or  emen- 
dations in  his  manuscript,  also  perhaps  because  the  copyist, 
writing  in  1674  (see  above,  Chap.  II,  4),  could  not  decipher 
the  marginal  note  in  MS.  G  any  better  than  we  can  now. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  in  a  few  in- 
stances MS.  D  corrects  a  faulty  reading  of  MS.  G  (v.  g. 
Gen.  50,  3  ^.^a^^  instead  of  ^y>.^^)  and  substitutes  a  more 
ordinary  expression  for  one  that  is  less  common  (v.  g.  Gen. 
50  22  and  50,  26  'i^J:^  instead  of  y^).  The  addition  of  ^J^ 
made  by  MS.  D  in  Gen.  50,  4  is  surprising. 


CHAPTER  Vir. 

TEXTUAL  AND  LITURGICAL  DIVISIONS. 

SEtrriONS  AND  LECTIONS. 

The  two  main  groups  into  whicli  we  have  classed  our  manu- 
scripts are  distinguished  not  only  internally  by  reason  of  the 
diiiference  of  translation  and  of  the  original  from  which  the 
version  was  made,  but  also  externally  l)y  tlie  diversity  of  the 
sections  and  liturgical  readings  into  which  the  text  is  divided. 
A.  As  to  the  division  of  the  text,  abstracting  from  the 
liturgical  rubrics,  it  may  be  said  that  the  first  group  ("MSS. 
H,  K,  L,  M.  N,  O,  P)  presents  the  following  number  of  sections', 
indicated  in  the  MSS.  mentioned  entirely  or  only  in  part,  in 
as  far  as  the  MSS.  comprise  either  the  whole  of  the  Penta- 
teuch or  (inly  one  or  two  of  the  five  books  2; 

Genesis  57  sections  i'iAyi), 

Exodus  19  sections  (i^^^yi), 

Leviticus  13  sections  {'i^\yi), 

Numbers  2:!  sections  (J-os), 

Deuteronomy     no  divisions. 
At  the  same  time  we  find  other  divisions  indicated  in  this 
first   group   (i.  e.  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  Ifi  =  H   which   are   taken 
over  from  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4  (see  above,  Chap.  Ill,  2): 
Genesis  12  sections  (-Irc^l  or  iiil^), 

Exodus  -    11  sections  t-lar^l  or  iii\^), 

'  Althougli  these  sections  are  called  "lections"  in  the  first  three  books 
of  the  Pontateuch  in  this  group,  yet  they  may  be  considered  sinijily  as 
divisions  of  the  text  without  rpforcnce  to  the  liturgy,  because  a  rubric 
is  added  to  about  onc-lialf  of  their  iiuniber  only  stating  on  what  day 
this  "lection"  is  to  be  "read"  at  the  Divine  Service. 

2  Compare  Swete's  Introduct.  to  the  0.  Test,  in  Greek,  Cambridge 
1902,  chap.  VI,  p.  34:2sqij. 


Part  I,  Chap.  YII  107 


Leviticus  28  sections  (^Is^l), 

Numbers  36  sections  {As^\), 

Deuteronomy  no  divisions. 
In  our  second  group  (MSS.  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  Gj  the  text 
was  not  broken  up  into  chapters  originally  or  divisions  of  any 
kind  (see  above,  Chap.  II,  \).  Now,  however,  we  find  indicated 
in  MSS.  A  and  F  a  series  of  sections  corresponding  exactly 
to  the  divisions  found  in  MS.  Vatic.  Ar.  2  =  S  (see  above, 
Chap.  V,  1,  and  also  Part  II,  Sec.  III).    Thus: 

Genesis  contains     47  sections  (J-«as), 
Exodus  26  sections  (J-^), 

Leviticus  16  sections  (J-oi), 

Numbers  35  sections  (J--ai), 

Deuteronomy  18  sections  (J-^), 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  give  a  complete  list  of  these 
"sections,  designating  those  of  the  first  group  by  the  abbreviat- 
ion we  have  chosen  for  the  main  MS.  from  which  they  are 
taken,  i.  e.  "H"— those  of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4  as  »H  bis",  since 
they  have  been  copied  into  '  MS.  H — those  of  the  second  gi'oup 
by  "AS"  in  accordance  with  the  abbreviations  used  for  the 
chief  MS.  into  which  they  have  been  introduced  eventually 
and  for  the  one  in  which  they  are  found  originally  (see  above. 
Chap.  V,  1,  note  2). 

List  of  Sections  found  in  tlie  First  Group  ("H"j  2. 

8)  Gen.     4,8 


GENESIS 

1) 

Gen. 

],1 

2) 

71 

l,(i 

3) 

H 

1,14 

4) 

11 

1,24 

5) 

11 

2,4 

«) 

11 

2,20 

"') 

H 

3,21 

9) 

)3 

4,].; 

10) 

» 

5,1 

11) 

•, 

5,  32  (Gr. 

6,  1) 

12) 

« 

6,9 

13) 

11 

7,1 

14) 

)) 

7,6 

15) 

n 

7,11 

Ki) 

,1 

8,4 

1  See  above,  Chap.  111,2. 

5  This  text  follows  the  Hebrew  order  of  chapters  and  verses. 


108  Textual  and  Liturgical  Divi^ons 


17)  Gen 

.     8.21'' 

53)  Gea 

,  45,17 

18) 

.. 

9,8 

54) 

11 

46,1 

19) 

9,18 

55) 

ji 

46,8 

20) 

I? 

10,32 

56) 

n 

48,1 

21) 

« 

11,10 

57) 

49,33 

22) 
23) 

M 

12,7 
13,12 

EXODUS 

24) 

n 

14,1 

l)Exod.    1,1 

25) 

11 

15.1 

2) 

» 

2,5 

26) 

r 

15,18 

3) 

n 

■2,11 

27) 

n 

16,17 

4) 

11 

2,23 

28) 

.. 

18,1 

5) 

w 

4,18 

29) 

n 

18,20 

fi) 

n 

4,27 

30) 

n 

19,1 

') 

n 

6,14 

31) 

n 

19,26 

8) 

11 

8,16 

32) 

V 

20,1 

9) 

11 

12,1 

33) 

11 

22,1 

10) 

>i 

12,43 

34) 

22,20 

1>) 

11 

13,20 

35) 

n 

24,1 

12)- 

r 

15,22 

36) 

25,1 

13) 

- 

19,1 

37) 

M 

25,19 

-         14) 

n 

20,22 

38) 

-. 

27,1 

15) 

n 

25,1 

39) 

11 

27,41 1" 

16) 

» 

28,2 

40) 

11 

29,1 

17) 

11 

31,18 

41) 

11 

29,32 

18) 

11 

33,1 

42) 

« 

30, 25 

19) 

11 

35,1 

43) 
44) 

11 

31,3 
31,17 

LEVITICUS 

45) 

11 

32,3 

1)  Lev. 

1,1 

46) 

11 

33,18 

2) 

11 

4,1 

47) 

n 

35,1 

3) 

n 

6,12  (Gr.6, 19) 

48) 

11 

35,21 

4) 

11 

7,11 

49) 

11 

37,1 

5) 

11 

11,1 

50) 

« 

39,1 

6) 

n 

12,1 

51) 

r 

40,1 

') 

11 

13,1 

52) 

11 

43,26 

«) 

11 

15,1 

Part  I,  Chap  VII  109 


9)  Lev. 

16,1 

ll)Num.  15,17(?) 

10)     „ 

18,1 

12) 

» 

16,1 

11)     „ 

21,1 

13) 

11 

19, 1(?) 

12)      „ 

22,1 

14) 

11 

20,2 

13)      „ 

25,1 

15) 

1) 

20,25 

16) 

11 

21,1 

NUMBERS' 

17) 

11 

21, 10 

1)  Num 

•    1,1 

18) 

11 

22,2 

2)      „ 

1,48 

19) 

11 

27,1 

3)      „ 

2,33 

20) 

11 

27,12 

4)      „ 

3,40(?) 

21) 

11 

32,1 

5)       „ 

5,1 

22) 

11 

35,1 

6)       „ 

7,1 

23) 

11 

36,1 

7)       „ 

9,1(?) 

8)       „ 

10,33(?) 

DEUTERONOMY 

9)       » 

13,1 

No  divisions. 

10)      „ 

15,1 

List  of  Sections  from  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  4  ("H  bis")  2. 

6)  Gen.   25, 19 


GENESIS 

1)  Gen. 

1,1 

2)      1, 

6,9 

3)      11 

12,1 

4)      „ 

18,1 

5)     „ 

23,1 

7) 

» 

28,10 

H) 

1? 

32,4 

9) 

» 

37,1 

10) 

H 

41,1 

11) 

» 

44,18 

12) 

n 

47,28 

'  In  group  I  ("H")  we  have  given  23  sections  for  the  book  of 
Numbers.  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16  (H)  itself  assigns  only  22  J^-^,  but  it  has 
the  inscription  "second  section"  twice,  at  Num.  1,48  and  2,33. 

MS.  Pocock.  219  (K),  which  contains  the  very  same  text,  titles  and 
notes,  gives  21  sections  for  Numbers;  but  there,  too,  we  find  the  second 
section  (J-«as)  indicated  twice,  Num.  1,48  and  2,33,  and  likewise  the 
twenty-first  section.  Num.  35, 1  and  36,  1.  AVe  may,  safely  assume,  there- 
fore, that  in  each  case  there  is  a  mistake  of  the  copyist,  and  that  in  fact 
the  book  uf  Numbers,  in  this  group,  comprises  neither  22  nor  21  but  23 
sections. 

2  This  text  follows  the  Hebrew  order  of  chapters  and  veraes. 


i  10  Textual  and  Liturgical  Divisions 


EXODUS 

22)  Lev. 

23)  „ 

23,1 

24,1 

1)  Exod.  1, 1 

24) 

» 

24,10 

i^) 

n 

0,2 

25) 

n 

25,1 

3) 

!) 

10,1 

26) 

n 

26,2 

4) 

11 

13,17 

27) 

!) 

26,14 

5) 

n 

18,1 

28) 

„ 

26,45'' 

6) 
') 

n 
» 

21,1 
25,1 

NUMBERS 

«) 

11 

27,  20 

1)  Num 

.     1,1 

9) 

n 

30,11 

2) 

1,49  (?) 

10) 

n 

35,1 

3) 

n 

3,40 

11) 

n 

38,  21 

4) 

)! 

5,1 

LEVITICUS 

5) 
•3) 

» 

5,8 
5,11 

1)  : 

Lev. 

1,1 

7) 

,, 

6,1 

2) 

n 

4,1 

8) 

n 

8,5 

3) 

n 

(3,12  (Gr.til9) 

9) 

„ 

9,1 

4) 

1? 

7,11 

10) 

H 

10,1 

5) 

M 

7,22 

11) 

n 

10,11 

'^) 

8,1 

12) 

n 

11,1 

') 

9,23 

13) 

Ji 

12,1 

«) 

« 

10,8 

14) 

„ 

\3,-2 

9) 

10,12 

15) 

,5 

15,1 

10) 

V 

11,1 

16) 

n 

15, 17 

11) 

n 

12,1 

17) 

„ 

15,27(?) 

U) 

v 

13,1 

18) 

!! 

16,  32  (?) 

13) 

14,1 

19) 

)) 

15,37 

14) 

15,1 

20) 

» 

16,1 

15) 

r 

15,16 

21) 

n 

17,41 

16) 

n 

15,18 

22) 

;i 

19,1 

1') 

:; 

16,1 

23) 

n 

19,14 

18) 

?) 

17,1 

24) 

,1 

20,1 

19) 

•« 

19,1 

25) 

,7 

20,14 

20) 

21,1 

26) 

n 

20,  23 

21) 

22,1 

27) 

)i 

21,4 

Part  I, 

Chap,  vn 

111 

28)  Num, 

.  21, 10  (?) 

34)  Num, 

,  27,15 

29) 

21,17(?) 

35) 

» 

31,1 

30) 

21,34 

36) 

!1 

33,1 

31) 

32) 

22,2 
25, 6 

DEUTERONOMY 

-33( 

2(i,  1 

No 

divisions. 

List  of  Sectious  found  in 

the  Second  Group  ("AS"')'. 

24)  I 

Geu. 

20,1 

GENESIS 

25) 

r 

21,1 

1)  Geu. 

1,1 

26) 

11 

21,22 

2) 

n 

2,4 

27) 

11 

22,1 

3) 

5) 

2,18 

28) 

11 

23,1 

4) 

!) 

4,1 

29) 

11 

24,1 

5) 

!) 

4,16 

30) 

11 

25,1 

6) 

» 

5,1 

31) 

11 

25,  5  ■ 

') 

» 

6,1 

32) 

11 

26,1 

8) 

» 

6,9 

33) 

11 

27,1 

9) 

)T 

8,20 

34) 

1, 

28, 10 

10) 

» 

9,18 

35) 

11 

29, 1 

11) 

I) 

10, 1 

36) 

n 

32,1 

12) 

11 

11,1 

37) 

11 

33,18 

13) 

)) 

11,10 

38) 

11 

35,1 

14) 

!1 

12,1 

39) 

11 

36,1 

15) 

?1 

13,14 

40) 

11 

37,1 

16) 

)J 

14,17 

41) 

11 

38,1 

17) 

1) 

15,1 

42) 

11 

39,1 

18) 

» 

16, 1 

43) 

11 

46,8 

19) 

)) 

17,] 

44) 

n 

47,13 

20) 

)) 

17, 15 

45) 

11 

47,27 

2J) 

)) 

18,1 

46) 

11 

49,1 

22) 

)) 

18, 20 

47) 

11 

50, 15 

23) 

)) 

19,30 

»  This  text  follows  the  Greek  order  of  chapters  and  verses. 

The  same  uumbcr  of  sections  as  in  MS.  Vat.  Ar.  2  are  also  found 
in  Florentine  MS.  Cod.  Palat.  orient.  XXI  and  in  MS.  Mxt.  664  of  the 
Imperial  Library  at  Vienna  (Flijoel's  Catalogue,  u.  1541). 


1 1 2  Textual  and  Liturgical  Divisions 


EXODUS 

1)  Exod 

•     1,1 

2) 

i» 

2,16 

3) 

« 

4,29 

4) 

» 

6,2 

5) 

1) 

6,14 

6) 

)i 

7,« 

7) 

)) 

11,1 

8) 

» 

12,29 

9) 

n 

13,1 

10) 

» 

14,5 

11) 

)) 

15,22 

12) 

I) 

17,1 

13) 

•  )) 

17, s 

14) 

)) 

18,1 

15) 

)i 

19,1 

16) 

•>•! 

20,  2 

17) 

!) 

21,1 

18) 

» 

24,1 

19) 

1) 

25,1 

20) 

IJ 

31,12 

21) 

11 

32, 25 

22) 

>! 

34,1 

23) 

)) 

34,21 

24) 

11 

36,8 

25) 

)1 

40,1 

26) 

>) 

40, 14 

LEVITICUS 

1) 

Lev. 

1,1 

2) 

n 

4,1 

3) 

)) 

6,1 

4) 

11 

6,8 

5) 

11 

7,20 

6) 

» 

8,1 

7)  Lev. 

9,1 

«)      .. 

9, 23 

^')      ,. 

11,1 

10)      .. 

13,1 

11)      ,. 

15,1 

12)      ,. 

16,1 

13)      .. 

17,1 

14)      ,. 

19,1 

15)      ,. 

24,1 

16)      „ 

2.5,1 

NUMBERS 

1)  Num 

.    1,1 

2)      ,. 

3,5 

3)      „ 

3,40 

4)      1- 

5,1 

5)      ,. 

5,5 

6)      „ 

6,1 

~')      1- 

7,1 

8)      „ 

8,1 

9)      „ 

9,1 

10)      ,. 

10,1 

11)      .. 

10,34 

12)      „ 

11,34" 

13)      .. 

13,2 

14)      ,. 

14,39 

15)      ,. 

15,1 

16)      .. 

16, 1 

17)      .. 

16,41 

18)      ,. 

17,1 

19)      .. 

18,1 

20)      .. 

19,1 

21)      .. 

19,6 

22)      , 

20, 14 

23)      ,. 

21,1 

24)      .. 

21.10 

Fart  I, 

Chap. 

VII 

11 

25)  Num. 

,22,2 

4)  Deut 

.    5,    1 

26) 

H 

26,1 

5) 

11 

10,12 

27) 

)) 

27,1 

6) 

11 

11,26 

28) 

H 

28,1 

7) 

1) 

13,    1 

29) 

11 

30,1 

.8) 

11 

14,    1 

30) 

11 

31,1 

9) 

11 

14,28 

31) 

11 

31,26 

10) 

11 

16,    1 

32) 

11 

32,2 

11) 

11 

16,28 

33) 

n 

33,1 

12) 

11 

18,    1 

34) 

1) 

33,50 

13) 

11 

20,    1 

35) 

" 

35,9 

14) 
15) 

11 

11 

21,22 
27,    1 

DEUTERONOMY 

16) 

11 

31,    1 

1.  Deut. 

1,    1 

17) 

11 

32,    1 

2. 

11 

3,23 

18) 

11 

33,    1 

3. 

11 

4,41 

B.    It 

is   not    our 

intention   to 

discuss    : 

in   detail  all  th 

liturgical  notes  found  in  the  MSS.  or  even  to  give  a  complete 
summary  of  them.  Still,  it  may  tend  to  a  better  understanding 
of  the  versions  of  the  two  main  groups,  if  we  catalogue  some 
at  least  of  the  "rubrical  matter"  we  have  gleaned  from  our 
MSS. 

"We  may  premise  that  in  none  of  the  MSS.  are  these 
indications  of  liturgical  readings  noted  without  omission  or 
without  mistake.  But  by  comparing  the  different  MSS.  of  the 
same  group  we  are  enabled  to  establish  what  appears  to  be 
a  fairly  complete  list  of  lections,  at  least  for  Genesis. 

We  shall  confine  our  remarks  to  the  first  book  of  the 
Pentateuch,  because  in  the  other  four  the  "ruljrics"  are  not 
so  numerous  as  to  allow  us  to  assume  that  we  are  dealing 
with  them  in  their  entirety.  At  the  same  time,  the  notes  from 
Genesis  alone  will  suffice  to  serve  the  purpose  of  showing  the 
difference  in  liturgical  use  between  the  versions  of  the  two 
groups. 

1)  In  our  first  group,  then,  we  find  the  following  "lections" 
in  Genesis: 

BaoDB,  Arabic  Pentateuch  in  the  Church  of  Egypt.  8 


114  Textual  and  Liturgical  Dinisions 


Monday  evening,  first  week  of  the  Fast. 

Continuation- of  the  lesson  of  Monday  evening. 

Tuesday  evening,  first  week  of  the  Fast. 

Wednesday  evening,  first  week  of  tlie  Fast. 

Thursilay  evenig,  first  week  of  the  Fast'. 

Friday,  first  week  of  the  Fast. 

Monday  evening,  second  week  of  the  Fast. 

Tuesday  evening,  second  week  of  the  Fast. 

^^'ednesday  evening,  second  week  of  the  Fast. 

Thursday  evening,  second  week  of  the  Fast. 

Friday,  second  week  of  the  Fast. 

Ninth  hour  of  Tuesday  of  Holy  Week. 

Monday  evening,  third  week  of  the  Fast. 

Tuesday  evening,  third  week  of  the  Fast. 

Wednesday  evening,  third  week  of  the  Fast. 

Thui'sday  evening,  third  week  of  the  Fast. 

Friday,  third  week  of  the  Fast. 

Monday  evening,  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 

Tuesday  evening,  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 
9, 18—10,  31   Wednesday  evening,  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 
10,32—11.9     Thursday  evening,  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 
11,10—12,  6     Friday,  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 
13,12 — 18         Monday  evening,  fifth  week  of  the  Fast. 
15,1  — 17         Tuesday  evenng,  fiith  week  of  the  Fast. 
16,17—17,27  Wednesday  evening,  fifth  week  of  the  Fast. 
18,1  — 19         Feast  of  the  Annunciation. 
IS,  20 — 33         Thursday  evening,  fifth  week  of  the  Fast. 
22,1  —19        Friday,  fifth  week  of  the  Fast. 
27, 1  — 41 "       Monday  evening,  sixth  week  of  the  Fast. 
31,3  — 16        Tuesday  evening,  sixth  week  of  the  Fast. 


'  MS.  Pocock.  219  adds:  (ji*^  Sy-^iji}  J^  ^JJI  i>j».Vl  ^^^ 
Aj  r-«aiJ  \  i.  e.  and  on  the  Sunday  before  Pentecost  and  over  the  "water- 
basiu",  i.  e.  at  the  so-called  "Mandatum".  Ajj-^aiJI  occurs  in  thfe  Copto- 
Arabic  MS.  Zoega  99,  where  it  renders  the  Copto-Greek  word  AAK.VMH  = 
pelvis  =  the  basin  used  at  the  ceremony  of  the  "Mandatum"  or  washing 
of  the  feet  on  Maundy  Thursday. 


Gen.  1,1  - 

-5 

„      1,6   - 

-13 

„      1,14- 

-23 

„      1,24- 

-2,  3 

„      2,4  - 

-19 

„      2,20- 

-3,  20 

„      3, 21  - 

-4,7 

„      4,8  - 

-15 

„      4,16- 

-26 

„      5,1  - 

-31 

„      6, 1  - 

-4 

„      6,5- 

-8 

„      6.9  - 

-22 

„      7,1  - 

-5 

„      7,6  - 

-10 

„      7,11- 

8,3 

„      8.4  - 

-21'' 

„      8,21" 

-9,7 

„      9,8  - 

-17 

Parti,  Chap.  VII  115 


Gen.  43, 26 — 45,  IG  Wednesday  evening,  sixth  week  of  the  Past. 

„    46,    1 —  7        Thursday  evening,  sixth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„     49,33-50,  26  Friday,  sixth  week  of  the  Fast. 

In   seeking   to  trace  the  origin  of  these  lections,   we  were 

for   a  long  time  unable  to  find  in  the  liturgical  books  of  any 

of  the  Oriental  Churches  lessons  agreeing  with  those  indicated 

in  the  MSS.  of  this  group.    Thus  they  differ  considerably  from 

the  liturgical  readings  of  the  Coptic  Church,  of  which  we  shall 

speak   presently;   and  there  is  also  a  great  diversity  between 

our   lections   and   those  given  by  A.  J.  Maclean  in  his  "East 

Syrian  Daily  Offices",  London  1894.    In  the  latter,  for  example, 

the  lessons  for  the  first  week  of  the  Fast  are  marked  thus: 

Monday,  Gen.  1, 1—20 

Tuesday,  Gen.  1, 20—2,  8 

Wednesday,  Gen.  2, 8—31 

Thursday,  Gen.  3,1—20 

Friday,  Gen.  3,20-24 
At  last  we  hit  upon  a  Melkite  Lectionary,  described  in 
Sachau's  Catalogue ',  in  which  the  arrangement  of  the  lections 
seemed  to  be  similar  to  that  on  our  MSS.  Dr.  H.  Pick  of 
the  Royal  Library  at  Berlin  was  kind  enough  to  send  us  an 
excerpt  of  the  lessons  of  Genesis  from  this  liturgical  MS.,  and 
we  found  them  to  be  in  every  instance  (except  for  two  or  three 
less  important  variants)  in  agreement  with  the  lections  marked 
in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16(H)  and  its  group.  Thus  the  Arabic  note 
on  fol.  21-''  of  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  16  stating  that  the  MS.  was  copied 
from  a  Melkite  original  (see  above.  Chap.  Ill,  2)  is  indirectly 
confirmed  by  the  arrangement  and  extent  of  the  official 
liturgical  readings  of  the  Melkite  Church. 

2)  Of  the  lections  indicated  in  the  MSS.  of  our  second 
group  (especially  in  MSS.  A,  B,  F)  it  may  be  said  that  they 
agree  in  almost  every  instance  with  the  readings  from  Scripture 


1  Verzeichnis  der  syrisclien  Handschriften  der  Konigl.  Bibliothek  zu 
Berlin,  von  E.  Sachau.  Berlin  1899.  Part  11,  page  876  (no.  320— Sachac 
74).  See  also  H.  Zotenberq,  Catalogue  des  manuscrits  syriaques  et  sabecns 
de  Ja  Bibliotheque  nationale,  Paris  1874 — Fonda  syi-iaque  10  (ancien  I'onds  4). 

8* 


116  Textual  and  Liturgical  Divisions 

as  they  are  found  iu  the  official  liturgical  books  of  the  Coptic 
ClmrchK  Taking  the  different  MSS.  into  account,  we  obtain 
a  fairly  complete  list  of  rubrics.  Iu  one  or  two  instances  only 
does  the  remark  in  the  MS.  disagree  with  the  rubric  in  the 
official  books,  and  even  then  this  seems  to  be  due  to  the 
mistake  of  the  copyist. 

Besides  the  readings  from  the  Pentateuch,  which  have  been 
mentioned     above     (quoting     from    Tuki"s     Euchologium — see 
Chap.  V,  2)   and  most  of  which  are  also  noted  on  our  MSS., 
we  may  catalogue  the  following  lections  from  Genesis: 
Gen.    1,1  —  2.3     Monday  of  Holy  Week,  in  the  morning. 

„      2, 16 —  3, 24  Monday  of  Holy  Week,  at  the  ninth  hour. 

„      6, 5  —  9,  7     Tuesday  of  Holy  Week,  at  the  ninth  hour. 

„    18, 1  —23        Thursday  of  Holy  Week,   -Lakane"  (Man- 
datum). 

„    22,1  —18        Friday  of  the  sixth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„    22,1—19        Thursday  of  Holy  Week,  at  the  ninth  hour. 

„    24, 1  — 9  AVednesday  of  Holy  Week,  at  the  ninth  hour. 

„    27, 1  — 4P       Monday  of  the  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„    28, 10—19        Tuesday  of  the  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„    28, 20—22        Tuesday  of  the  fourth  week  of  the  Fast 

„    32,  l"*— 18        Thursday  of  the  fourth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„    32, 19—30        Thursday  of  the  foiirth  week  of  the  Fast. 

„    48, 1  —19        Friday  of  Holy  Week,  at  the  third  hour-. 

„   49,1  —12        Saturday  2  of  the  seventh  week  of  the  Fast. 

„   49, 33—50, 26  Friday  of  the  seventh  week  of  the  Fast 

>  On  the  liturgical  lections  in  the  Coptic  Church  compare :  P.  de 
Lagabde,  Die  koptischen  Handschriften  der  Gottinger  Bibliothek,  in  Ab- 
handlungen  der  histor.  philos.  Klasse  der  Kgl.  Gesellschaft  der  Wissensch. 
zu  Gottingen,  XXIV,  1879;  also  the  "Book  of  the  Holy  Pasch"  called  in 
Coptic:  OV^tOU  IITB  niHAGVA  GBOTAB  KA  TA  •hlASlC  IJT6 
•|-eKK.\HCIA  IJA.\6EAIiApillH  Cairo  1899;  and  the  "Katameros"  of  the 
Coptic  Church,  which  has  lately  been  published  by  the  "Librairie  Helio- 
pohs",  Eue  Clot  Bey,  No.  24,  Cairo,  Egypt,  under  the  title:  Katameros 
pour  tons  les  jours,  les  dimanches  et  les  fetes  de  I'an,  2  vol.  in  folio  in 
Coptic  and  2  vol.  in  Arabic — about  2000  pages. 

2  Called  "the  Saturday  of  Lazarus''  =  the  Saturday  before  Palm  Sunday. 


CONCLUSION 

To  summarize,  then,  the  results  of  this  our  Study  from 
eighteen  Arabic  and  Copto-Arabic  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch, 
we  may  draw  the  following  conclusions: 

1)  There  must  have  been  in  use  in  the  Church  of  Egypt 
two  distinct  Arabic  versions  of*  the  Pentateuch,  one  in  the 
Melkite,  the  other  in  the  Jacobite  (Coptic)  Branch  of  the 
Clmrch. 

2)  These  two  versions  were  most  likely  officially  recognized 
translations,  since  they  are  found  not  only  in  a  large  number 
of  representative  manuscripts,  but  also  in  such  manuscripts  as 
bear  every  indication  of  having  been  employed  in  the  Liturgy. 

3)  For  collating  and  supplementing  their  sacred  volumes, 
the  Christians  of  Egypt  made  use  of  other  Arabic  versions 
besides,  notably  versions  made  from  the  Hebrew  (Saadias 
version'  and  others');  and  even  the  Samaritan-Arabic ^  version 
was  known  to  them  and  utilized  by  them. 

Moreover,  it  seems  to  us  that  the  Arabic  version  of  the 
Pentateuch  in  the  Melkite  Church  is  older''  than  that  used 
by  the  Copts;  for  in  the  MSS.  of  the  latter  we  find  a  great 
number  of  variants  which  are  manifestly  taken  from  the  Melkite 
version,  but  not  vice  versa  s. 

The    Arabic   translation   of  the   Pentateuch   read   in   the 


1  See  Chap.  V,  1. 

5  See  Chap.  Ill,  2  and  Chap.  V,  4. 

3  See  Chap.  Ill,  1. 

*  Compare  "Introduction",  towards  the  end,  where  we  have  pointed 
out  an  historical  reason  why  the  Melkite  Arabic  version  is  probably 
older  than  that  of  the  Coptic  Church. 

5  A  detailed  discussion  of  the  nature  and  import  of  the  variant 
readings  goes  beyond  the  scope  of  our  present  inquiry. 


1 18  Conclusion 


Coptic  Church  was  made  from  the  Coptic  text  directly,  and 
only  indirectly  from  the  Greek  of  the  Septuagint.  This  is, 
vre  think,  beyond  doubt.  But  as  to  the  Melkite  version,  the 
investigation  of  the  original  whence  this  translation  was  made ' 
presents  various  perplexing  problems  which  might  well  form 
the  subject  of  a  special  and  interesting  critical  text-study_. 
For  on  the  one  hand  the  text  agrees  in  many  respects  with 
the  Septuagint,  especially  in  Lucian's  recension,  on  the  other 
it  shows  decided  affinities  with  the  Hebrew  Bible  and  with 
the  Syriac  of  the  Peshitto. 


See  Chap.  Ill,  2  and  3. 


APPENDIX  I 

Note  I  found  on  a  double  fly-leaf  in  MS.  B.  N.  Ar.  12. 

Ce  pentateuque  arabe  est  una  version  faite  sur  le  Grec. 
Ainsi  les  enfants  dAdam  et  ceux  de  Noe  se  rapportent  pour 
le  temps  de  leur  vie  a  la  supputation  des  Septante.  Au  dc- 
nombrement  fait  au  Livre  des  Nombres  chap.  I  Gad  est  place 
apres  Benjamin.  Au  second  chapitre  du  meme  livre  le  terme 
Tay/ia  "ordo"  est  conserve  dans  I'arabe  en  lui  donnant  une  in- 
flexion arabe.  Abiu  fils  d'Aaron  est  appele  Abiud  comme 
dans  les  Septante  aussi  bien  que  Gedson  au  lieu  de  Gerson. 
Au  29  vers,  du  cb.  Ill  du  raeme  Livre  des  Nombres  on  lit 
Dael  pour  Lael  et  cb.  IV  v.  2  viginti  au  lieu  de  triginta, 
lorsqu'il  est  dit  dans  I'flebreu  ques  les  Levites  serviront  depuis 
30  ans  jusqu'a  50. 

II  y  a  peut-etre  quatre  ou  cinq  endroits  ou  la  version  arabe 
suit  I'Hebreu;  sans  doute  que  le  Grec  qu'on  traduisait  avait 
une  autre  le^on  que  le  notre.  Si  I'on  voulait  marquer  tons 
les  endroits  ou  I'arabe  et  le  Grec  sout  d'accord  et  contraires 
k  I'Hebreu  on  ne  fiuirait  pas.  Ajoute  que  presque  tous  les 
noms  propres  d'homme  ou  de  ville  sont  ecrits  en  caracteres 
grecs  au  dessus  de  I'arabe.  On  voit  souvent  entre  les  lignes 
des  mots  arabes  qui  ne  sont  que  de  purs  synonymes  de  ceux 
sur  lesquels  ils  sont  places.  C'est  I'ouvrage  du  copiste  ou  de 
quelqu'un  qui  aura  6te  possesseur  de  ce  raanuscrit. 

Les  marges  sont  assez  souvent  chargees  d'ecriture,  voici 
quel  en  est  I'usage.  On  y  marque  fort  rarement  et  en  deux 
mots  tout  au  plus  le  sujet  du  chapitre.  Mais  on  y  met  tres 
souvent  une  deux  et  trois  expressions  synonymes  de  celles  du 


1  See  Chap.  Ill,  1. 


120  Appendix  I  and  H 


texte.  On  y  corrige  quelques  fautes  du  copiste.  On  y  rap- 
porte  des  opinions  des  Juifs  mais  tres  rarement.  On  y  fait 
observer  aussi  2  ou  3  fois  les  differences  qui  se  trouvent  entre 
I'Hebreu  et  le  Grec.  On  remarque  par  exemple  qu'il  n'y  a 
aucun  texte  hebreu  oil  on  lise  Cainan  parmi  les  descendants 
de  Noe,  mais  on  n'y  dit  rien  sur  les  aunees   des  patriarches 

Dans  le  29  chapitre'  des  Nonibres  11  y  a  une  page  dont 
la  marge  est  remplie  d'un  long  texte  qui  se  lit  dans  I'Hebreu 
et  dans  les  Septante  comme  le  copiste  a  soin  d'en  avertir  en 
ajoutant  que  ce  morceau  manquait  dans  le  manuscrit  qu'il  a 
copie.  II  faut  observer  que  la  Genese  est  intitulee  Livre 
Premier  dans  un  titre  courant  sur  toutes  les  pages  et  les 
quatre  autres  sout  comme  les  Septante,  I'Exode,  le  Levitique, 
les  Nombres  et  le  Deuteronome  ces  quatre  mots  traduits 
en  arabe. 

L'auteur  de  cette  version  est  Gergis  comme  ecrivent  et 
prononcent  les  arabes  c'est  ;i  dire  Gregoire  -  selon  notre 
prononciation. 

Voici  comme  il  fiuit  sa  traduction. 

Super  manum  intirmae  creaturae  Dei  in  scientia  et  in  opere 
Gergis  ben  Alcis  abil  mupadal  ben  Amil  al  JNlolouc  ,_ycoi.^ 
<iJJl  i_9iJ  clLjl  cy^*  c??  ,J-«ii-Jl  ^\  ^'s^\  1^,  favor  (seu 
benignitas)  Dei  (fuit)  in  vigesimo  octavo  die  mensis  Abib  anni 
millesimi  sexagesimi  noni  martyrum  sanctorum  (Christi  1363), 
qui  respondet  vigesimo  diei  mensis  Gomadi  posterioris  Hegirae 
anni  754. 


APPENDIX  II 

Last  page  (fol.  B**)  of  the  Introduction  preceding  Genesis  ^ 
in  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424. 


»  The  lacuna  extends  from  28, 23  to  29, 5  incl.  See  Part  I,  Chap.  Ill, 
note  1. 

'  "Gergis",  ^ji^s^^is.,  is  the  Arabic  for  George,  not  Gregory. 
3  See  Chap.  IY\  4." 


Appendix  II  121 


<*.J-e.^   ^^   UL^l    i_i.JI    i^^UrJ'   ^_yUi».JI    a43->    >Lk«3J.    «4,.^    rr"-^. 

ly.jiji  ^_jk^  li3.s^-°-?.  |J  i.iLJ-s«j  U-vvJ  U^il  iJLa-?.^  r-ob  Uy-ji-^l 
j-ob  A,XjiX^  '■'^3>  '■'--'-'^U  L^ji.,_»ixJ  la^^X,«j»  l-^j-vJI  i\,^\  <*.,L43iJl 
l_jj^li    145.^;^^   rt'^'^    l^JM^Jl  i^^Wj^^    j^Li*.    ijj.^   0^3  '^■^^    r^ 

^^bc^l  ^^\  (sic!)  -J^^^-U  'y^j  i<^*^'   )^^  br^-**  i_5^=^  b'iil^jUtl 


PART  II 

TEXTS 


NOTE  ON  THE  .TEXTS 

The  texts  comprise  Chapters  I  to  VI,  XVIII  and  L  of  Genesis.  As 
explained  in  Part  I,  Chap.  VI,  the  texts  given  in  Section  I  anil  Section  II 
represent  a  "normal"  text  of  the  two  main  groups,  respectively,  a  tenta- 
tive restoration  of  the  original  text  obtained  by  collating  the  several 
manuscripts. 

Variants  of  the  different  IMSS.  are  designated  by  the  capital  letter 
which  stands  for  the  manuscript  in  which  they  are  found;  variants  written 
above  or  below  the  text  or  on  the  margin  of  the  MSS.  are  designated 
by  an  Arabic  exponent  to  the  right  of  the  capital  letter.  Thus,  v.  g..  A' 
indicates  the  first  (or  the  only)  variant  found  in  MS.  A,  A'  another 
variant  in  MS.  A;  variants  with  the  same  exponent,  however,  need  not 
necessarily  have  been  taken  from  the  same  manuscript.  For  on  expla- 
nation of  the  "normal''  text  see  Part  I,  Cliap.  VI;  see  also  List  of 
Abbreviations  in  Part  I,  Chap.  II. 

For  the  peculiarities  of  language  in  these  texts  we  refer  to  G.  Graf, 
Der  Sprachgebrauch  der  iiltcsten  christlich-arabischen  Literatur,  Leipzig 
1905.  It  may  be  noticed  tliat  in  Group  I  Hamza  is  generally  not  written, 
while  in  Group  II  it  is  placed  fairly  consistently;  Teshdid  is  used  quite 
frequently  in  both  groups;  I\[edda,  however,  occurs  only  exceptionally  in 
any  of  the  MSS. 

.Section  III  contains  the  text  of  MS.  Vat.  Ar.  2  (sec  Part  I,  Chap.V,  1); 
Section  IV  the  text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424  (see  Part  1,  Chap.  IV,  4). 


SECTION  I 

NORMAL  TEXT  OF  GROUl'  I 
(MSS.  H,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P) 

j^UJ*  ^y  ^y  <^JJ1 

J6^   LJl^   *LJI    ^^^    vi-oU  ^^^^  Ul  k^5  .>J^  cr^J  <^AJ1  Jli^  6 

(-,-o_j  ^L\  cus.-^  i3>>-'  ^   ••UJ  \  i^j^,    ^^  \   ij-'*^^^  ~>S.i.\    i^JJ  \   5-^-0^  7 

^^IS^     l^*.^     ^(S^     Cf-^i^     ''^Jl    <^^(     ^_$^rs    U-^    ^>-m    <^il^    l^J'3  8 

^a.\j    j*sr°    Jl     U.~-J1     CUs:^     ^_,XJ\     sL^Jl     e*^f-'^^     <^1     J  1^5  9 

j:U-c>JI  ^juaP'"  ^1  !il^\  c^A.,^;;^!^  cJJjj  ji^  ^j-^-^'^  x^'^-t^i 

.UJI   yiJ^    'IjLs.''    »UJ1    5^15*    ^_ji^O|    fiUjl    ,jr-^l    ^^1    5,j«-o\5    l<i 
.^.....^  ^s^    »jy    l^;b    &J^.^J^    OV    >;^J1    j^=^J    ^:U\    JLs,    11 

5  N  ^j^i-*^^  >*  ^■  j>)\  '  N  jl^V  8  K  ^^-vUsw  (sic) 


■\-  Xnrmal  Text  of  Group  I  |<ien.  1, 13—26] 

<UJ\  y^ij  Ji>j\\  J-ft   '  i~Jlsr^'  %s^  <>^»  »jy>  ^JJl  \r^  ;->l-o 

\h1^  u    -kv^    — L«.<ao  ^v;»*  Lm-wc   lIj^5    ^  ^ 
fl^^5     O^j^h     <Cj'-«iL»JU     liyLJ,     J^l     ^-O,    ^Ltr-Jl     ^.^ 
jUJ^    ^lii   J^^Ml    ^    l_^K,>Jj  U--JI    jAiw   ^i   L^-oUi  L^.l^   15 

,_jsr-J^  j^i  ^w.y  j^-^^i^ 

jpj'^l  J*  ^-u;J  U->Jl  jd^  j,  <UJ\  UaJi-i.  17 
^._^   '^1   viUi  ^1  ^f 
J*  s^U.  ^  ila.    "V^5  Cj^jIj^   ■'»L^"i)\   \^  <)JJ1  Jli"^  20 

^,1    <iJ}\    ^ki^    d^-^J    ^l^     l:'^>    ^i'J»    ^j      L!,,--;U^IS     »UJ\ 

_,ls^*    J    ^_^1    »U^1    \^\^    l^_^lj    \_^\   Mj.IS   <UJ1    f^.^.i  22 

jj~^jL.   '  *  ^^  _L— «o  ^^'S,  L»wc  ^^»j  23 
"••e^\    Ol^i    U,--^    i;^    L-^i-i    J=;^(    EJ*^^   •*^*    J^(5)    24 

^;^UL*r».    ^_^    \»,wj_J^    \_i4^^^>    l^,v«<aS    L)L»J1    fJ-^aJj    <)JJ  I   Jlj*}    2ti 


10  K  Lj»ij  II  N  fUift  12  i.f.  jiiU^j  13  X  y  UN  ;>s^l 


[Gen.  1,27— 2, 9]  Part  II,  Section  I  5* 

l4,.J.e    U^^l^    J>y'^i\    \^\^    \^\^    L.»il    ^il»    aUI    l*.«^^b^  28 

tjx^-  t))  ^^-^  ^r^  '^^'^  <i  '^  ^^  ^5  ^"'j"^-''  *^^  i3y  •^=^>?. 

Ijrj.    io^.~^o^  ^Jb  lili   ''<)^aX-o  uI^  <)JJI  j^^  31 

^>L.j   f^j   r'-C"^   o'^J    '■^^'^   0*^5 
U-^^Xo-,   ^.^^^^   ^\^^}   iU-^vkJl   OJ~»^3    1     II 

»;-oj   ^1  <)^JUI  Ux>l   ^J(  <xJL»«.l   J^S" 

.^JUI     ijiiw     j,_jj^     IXJLlua^      jl      i^'j'i'l^      U->~J(      iiia.      ''-t_jUJ     IJ.A    4 

(Jj  J=;NH  ,^=.5  J^  1^  J^l   ^S^.   (J  aUI  £jNJ  ^*^.  ^\  J^S 
^.^.^i.   l..»»jiJ    ^LvJ^)\    .Las   !(l^\    ^.».»»«J 


1  N  <>^i\  (sic)         2jv'  ^U:.-o.  5.^.»i»        3  N  —  1— AjbjJl         1  l:\IN' 
\JoU>  *  N  l-o 

13  L  1  JjUU  (sic) 


6*  Normal  Text  of  Group  I  [Gen.  2, 10—25] 

, Ob JJ \    Jvs>. V?.    liTUjb.     '  ^X-L^gj  1 

,^svi\.    j.»J».Ml    Ovi^J*     '-^^f^.   '^^>»}    '>^^    Jfj"^^     ^^^    k— ^*>«    12 

^^i^\    J>^\    jk.   k^.  ^JJl  yb^  ^l^^   ^LiJl  ^^Jl   <^\5   13 

Ol>JI     5^yi     ;J=r^Jl     ^>5 

-.^^juJl  ^i>ji  j,  <^X*i^3  «(^iX^  ^jiJl  ^j^L»JV\  <}JM\  Jjjll  J^lj  15 


j.;.^    5j^5   ^yb.  ^1    3^L^NU   ^^^...^s-.  NJ   .^Vl   iIj^I    -"JUfl  18 

^\^  U^\  ^  Ji^  Jiil  ^^^5  J^  J=/J\    ^^  ^Ul   ^a^5  19 

L<^^*j\    »^9  <j^<^A.   L-^i-j    'do    ",_,^« 

.JvJjo    L»j.   Jjta.5  du>^>i\  Jowl  Jsji.1^  fUi  LiU-^'  f^l  ^J.fr  «)JJ\  ,_yiJU  21 

y>\  J,\  L^p^  il^^l  fM  ^^  »JvrL\  ^JJI  ji-^l  ,J.JMl  iJl,y\  LiJU  22 

»l_^l  Ujj'  sJ^jb  ,_j^  1^   p-i»  ^_5-<^  cr^  r'**  *^  0>^^  ?^*  (Jl-"  23 

^^0.5  iS\j^h   JvoJo.,  <)Jl3    HgUi  J^y\  ^yo.  cU>  J^\    10^^  :i4 


I  (ilosseina  2  N  —  J^_5^.  ^  KL  sic;  N   J^  J^p",  lineola 

appositsi,  lit  videtur,  lul  delendum  ^  <N  -|- ^l  •    N  i^L^J'^Lj 

c  N  \iU  '  sic  orancs  »  N  ^:x^*^  '  ^'  '-fer^v  '"  ^  cr*^ 

^11  N  »yl  (sic)  '2  N  J-*»^  iJ  X  -    UjbUf  1*  X  +  *yy>^.5 

(sic  J  V.  supra  v.  16) 


[Gen.  3, 1  -  14]  Part  II,  Section  I 


)is\3  •)>  <iS}\  f^  ju  ^  ^-^i  i\j^  :l^\  cuJiii  <iJ)i\  Cjji\ 

^3^y.J\    ^   i^    3  Js-    ^    JiU    r^^    2il^\    CUJli-    2 

ijy»j  ^L^  u^i  b_^  M^ 

^lj^^'  Ijyo  ^_y--<J  isl^^  i^*  ^:xlli3  4 
i^LJ^So'^    U^^-^^'     Joi.-o'    U3J-C    ^^jl^b"    j,y.    j,^!    jfijo    ,*JJI    j;_^  5 

6^^.^\    syi-J   'iSj^  Uj\^  JSUJI   ^1^^  »/f^^^  o'  ''^j^'  ^1'5   '^ 

L<gJj<-J  cJbA\^  CUi^li  Uo-Jr-flJ"  j;^  »!  _-oM  1  O j^l-s  j-ii-i-J ^  i-U»^^3 

^^b^  'Jj_j^j'^  CUi-i?  ^^>yL^\  j3  L-ioU  kiLJ^^  CUji-^-^  JUi  10 
j-^^JI  ^^  ,_,5-Uk*l  ^A  ,_jA^  CUJ-Arw  ^\  'i\^\  ^\  f>\  Jlii  12 
aJ^jiI*    "j^^"    viLJls    \Xa>  C-Jjii   M    *-^''   <*J'^1   Cjj^\    JLis    14 

1  N  J-isl        2  M  'i\^^\        3  N  +  ;Uj'\        4  N  ;Uj"\        »  N  -  ^ 

sic  omnee,  pro  jjU  n  N  ^_^Lxi  12  N  LB.oi.Ji  13  jj  i3\yii\^  1*  N 
^V       '5  N  ii\_;^SU,  sic  fere  semper      is  N  iXJ.1  (j-^-^^-"^*       i''  N  ,^y^' 

BaoD£,  Arabic  feutateuch  in  the  Cbuich  uf  Egypt,  9 


8*  Normal  Text  of  Group  I  [Gen.  3, 15—4, 6] 

j^^  „*  U^ijj  cr^i  ^^))  orrr^i  ''r^*  o-:;^5  '^■^'^  "j'"^  f^S  ^^ 
^.jJJ  ^U:^M'o.  JJ.^3^"5  ail^=..l   J:i\  iy^  J>\  n"\^\U  J'JS^  16 

^\  'iys^^'^   CJ-*  ^^^^"^'5  ^'\^(  Or-=>  ^^^^--^  ^'il    f^"^  J ^5   17 

cUL^  fill  t:^*^  Ut^  J.S'Ij  iJLi^b^ 
Jii.\  ^-ixt  JS'b'^  cU  .r-^"  ^yLJi\^  viU^\  18 

kr-«  C5^'  J'.^^'  J'  >!^'  o>^  ^rr^  J^^"  -^^^^^i  3f^i  19 

J^  Js  ^l  Uj-Sl  \^   ii3\^\  fM  Ujsi  20 
Uv-r-"!^  >^\  ,^  J<^'^   s^l^M^  f>M  <»JM\  Cj^\  s-L-o^  21 

cf^'  J^^'^l  ^3  J-*^  rrr*-J'  ^5V  cr*  "^^^  S^y'  "<)^yi.U  23 

^-ojJDI    y^\j    «_-^joUI    ^^>^    J-?'-'^    d»-.'.5L>o<j    JiJ^   f>i    rj^^i   2"^ 
iiUi.\   isj.s^    Ji.^    iiki.sr^'   iL^JJiJ^l    13^U1    »2v_.^  '^r^5 
C-Jl3j     '^i>r^^     *^-^J5     v^^^^     <Jol^\     \^     fil    ^^J     1     IV 

vILiyJ  '->^y>   <>^'   »;-*J   cr*  Cr:^-*^  S-''^   f^*   "^^    O*^  ^^   3 
'S^ib  Ji.0^  J-ol4^  iS]\'^.y^  L«3JU.*jj  <)^.»^^LSj1  ^^  J-c^'-*  S-''-^5  * 

viMa^^  ,,r- ^*   (J5  >-^j=>-  0;-«  1>UJ  cr^.'-*-'  ''^■''^'  vV  J*-"  6 


■4  N  i:i\yc\  ^\       i  N  A;i2^53^  6  X  -  Ji^       '  N  ^'^       8  N  J^b 

»  N  J^L^J  ">  X  ^^^  "  K  deest  v.  23 

i>  N  ^b  M  KN  lijLsxXJ  15  sio  semper 

"  L  O^lj"  bis         18  X  Ajb  J>^ 


[Gen.  4, 7—19]  Part  IT,  Section  I  9* 

^yo.    viJ^J    j..^!    CU^k=Lli    (J   ^1^    .iLU    J^    CU.U^=^1     i^\    7 

14^1    ij-f-*-*   ^^'5   *^>^^ 

(iJJCiii  <*.-v:H    iJ^L*   ^.6  ,^j>^}i    ^j.lj>    Ll>_^  1    ^(3  |j|L_.iX^ 
ijLs?.    »2^ls    JjU    Ji-   ^^    cUJ^    ^_^   <0^1  Oyi  ^J  JUii   15 


i>-Ov>w<  (_y»-^.  i^'^i  ry"^  dj^35  '"^'^^'■f^^^  i*.ilj^'  j^jJoLs  v_9ys5  17 
i5j^>|\JLv«3    '^J^.^^J-<=-»  -^J^    ''^^^r^^    '^^'j-^    C-?"^^    "^.J^   ^^ 


U»».^_j  O^.  >i'^'^5  '^"~?  (J*  A-<ol^  2  Nj^  (sic)  3  N  ijl 

*  N  »_^5  '•  sic  omnes;  lege  ^J^iH  g  M  iJ«*  j^j^  (sic)  '  N  <i^^S 
8  N  c>5^^3  »  L  lil*^  (sic),  N  l-*)lj  10  N  deest  i^j  J»;'^^  '*^j 
11  L  Ult_^  (sic),  N  U^Ls  12  N  crr^jlJ"  1^.  (sic)  »  K  il_^,  N  jlJ^ 
n  N  J-o_\*s.O  (sic)  15  N  J.^\_j3:\^^  is  I,  jvliiyu  N  J.>Jo^AU 
"  N  crr:"^"lj^*  18  K  M  N  l*4jj"^>^^  i^  N  —  sUaJ;  videtur  esse 

scribendum:  Ai>l ,  i.  e.  alia  scriptio  nominis  \>\i,  quae  ex  margine  tan- 
dem iuvecta  est  in  ipsum  textum,  ideoque  delenda 

9* 


10*  Xormal  Text  of  Gronp  T  [Oeu.  4, 20—5, 8] 

^.^i^5  3._^i^i  ^s^  ^  j;'  j^  .•*5 '  J^t^y.  '^^  ^^W  20 

«cu=L\.  jo.j^l,  ^ys^J*  ^\^    ->s   .*5    •■J-cJy   CjJ^J^  :il--»5   22 

I'U^U,   ^y^    '"^j   ^-^^-^^  '■'(j^'    J-=^'   cy  Jy^  ^^^-^' 

^,oi-_^-  ^M  ^;j-<  ajU  crr^-'^  0-*  r^-^.  ^'-»^^'  «>j>-;-^  ^^.io.  '-'^^jli  24 

,i..^\    c-jijj    '■'^LcUi    Cj^J^i    cuUsi'    >;:=-    ii.*J-y\   ^>\   sj.fi  25 
j^u  J  JO  _^T  .jo^  J,  fis  ^i\  j^\  ^^^  iii.is   "=Ju^ 

^^\    l^;j.    ^>S    ^i^    JiyI    <i^-.-^l    lft->5     "f^    "'Ju--^    jJ^j   26 

.iJ'iJi  Cjj-I>  (►•^Ij  *y>>^. 

^y\    ^    jJloi    d^,ui    ^.-  0  *>  j    (_j-^'-*    ^—"■CV**'    1^*5    ^ 

jj«.  ^^j-v^L-)  j<"^5  ^Lo  5-;-»^  ij^y^^  ^  ^^5  '*''"^  c-~^  '-^'^■c^  'S'^i  '' 

iijLx^\j,  N  jUjDIj  1  L  J-:r?y.,  JI  J-:^y.  N  ^;_,^by  U>j.\ 

c  L  JI  Uj«j  (M  J-n^y)  J-^?y.  ••^-^^j,  N  ^M>-»->  cxH'-' ^-^  ^^^-^^^       ■"  N 
»Lv>»-J  8  ^'   UvJ  *!  N  (_r>  *  ' "  N  J^j  ' '  N  f y* 

iJ  M  ,_y.;-»iaJo  (sic)  X  ^Xi-JL-oXj  (sic)  la  N  v.  21:    ^l  Jj>.\  ,;^-« 

j^j.*ji,^^   d^sL.^  (_J,\  (sic)   ii'-«'^»  Cr:>?.'^  hlsL-iJ"   i-ja^A^   J^i  >«  N 

<^-^»)         '■'■  X  Lol,  suprascriptura  Ui^  lo  L  ^-^^-^rr"'         "  M  L«^ 

18  <*oL»  sic  fere  omnes  semper 


[Gen.5, 9— 28]  Part  II,  Section  I  11* 

^^I-LO      <*J      ■^^^       I  ^^.W      ^^_^J!..>«0«      AiLo      |_pjjj'      ij^'^'i      ^ 

^k^wj    -,UXft    ^,4^.,,tt,?fc.tt    <^iLo    J,^-**j    /^LLo     '^^J    wXJa   l.xjvjl_>   ^«'*->l   ^_J^^5     1 - 
l^Lo    ^     jjj>*^A-J        ■*<  q  "^.^    ^jLo    ^.■h^O     l^V'    lT**  g^.*  o  *^      tV;^*     ^^ 

j^Lo    Ji   ^^y<J..u>    «->^;   aSLo   ^x^    ^<S.^   l^^   ^   g^  »->    ''o>'^3    ^'^ 

9j-,.;JUj'^      A.iU      5^^^        '■'5'-?.      •*"'       ^S       "^l-cJ^JO       ^J_^\)^U3.-0       ^1^5     16 


CJ-: 


l!1jLo     aJ     ^^^4-0 


j:_jU^I  <iJ  j^J^^  i-Lco  ^..;J:-cj^   i-^^.-yo'l^  iiLc   '>_jb  ^U^  18 

vxlj^  iLl.*v   i.iL«   '3^1.^  r>'^^  "^  '^■'j  '^  '^■^^  k>^   '^j^.  ij-'^^i  19 

joJ   ^<<L.w   |^-*Xa«jj   ^^_y,v^l   ^Lo  j,i*o   ">jIj  o^'^  '^  5-:^^    '"C''^5  ^'^ 

J_i>jX/«      <*J      >>.J«      LovXJO        '^^XiLI      ^J^^i     *JJ^      f^'-*'^"     ji^-^l      |^.«-..i».l«  22 


, ;L>^.^  a        *v^-0      ^J      i^'aa 


t  M  —  .LU)  2  jr  _  ^  3  L  —  j_jiU^  U9i|ue  ad  J^y  )i4^ 

9  ML  o>^5         '"  M  O*^        "  L  Cr«^         '^  M  CrT^*         ''  ^^  cr^ 
14  M  ^-t-^         15  M  deest  v.  25         '6  M  gx«o         n  L  Cj^$ 


12*  Nortnal  Text  of  Group  I  [Gen.  5, 29—6, 12] 

MJ\    Ua-^   ^_yXJ^    J=jM\   ^^^    l-^.Jol 


^^    L>J     »|^    (jJ^s^li   OU.--=>-    ^1-^1    O'-o    s,JjJl  yj   ^1_^   2 
J^\   ^   yt^J(  ^UJ\  ^V  J  o^5^  C--^^--^"  ^   '^^^   S^y^   J^5   3 

Ja.\   ^^   ^>   J.SU    ^^^   J=,_jM\   J.*  V^il  f^Ml  'ilij  (3  0*^5  4 
(^  O'^.  '-o*^  >y^*  ^"-^  J-'  *y^^  <>-'^'   "r^   "*o* 

Jpj^J\    ,^,    ^^    .JUil=L    ^^.JJ\  y±^\    i_j>JJM  <OV\  Oyi   Jlii  7 

iiJ'i)!   i^Jl   flJji  i^Jii   -y  «J^^  8 
'^■5  f^5  f^  dy^  ^•^^  c^  ^"^i  ^'"^ 


1  INI  >_,~-»^  2  L  crr-«'3  (sic)  '  M  c>^  *  M  5<-»J  »  L 
^y»^^^  c  [j  v.iUsbj  7  ]\[  —  14J  8  M  in  margine  ^►.-^^\  ^-o 
»  M  +  0-*  '"  M  —  ^;^1  11  L  M  ^-o  (sic)  12  L  Ji^,  M  ^;Jl^ 
i>  ^^^l;*-^^,  i.  e.  L  ";L'l>.>..i  14  fortasse  deest  verbum  i'  L  0-»io 

18  sic  omnes,  i.  c.  0^^-^>5         ■'  M  — <»J'^\         's  lege:  ^>_;^'   o^ 


[Gen.  6, 13—22,  18, 1—5]        Part  11,  Section  I  13* 

O--:^'*  CJ-:^^  .x^--ij.  ^  ^^o,  ^^^^J\  ^  ^^x^  j,.iL«3^l  ^  ^^^  19 
^  ^^5  i.^,J.   ^t)U^J\    3  cr-'^    ^^-;i    U-Jl    ,^    3  ^^  20 

»_^^Ajkll  cj'^   'o<iv.iL^  v_ib 
ls»5»    LoCU"   \^ls    J Uj. 5    iilj"  lilj    jki    <*,-^^^jo    ~.y.jbji\    ^y^^  2 

\JJL<b    ijjiil   Jlis    |j,j-v3^    IJub    J^jo^    C>>'^'^".?    'i^^  C^y^'''^^  ^ 

•  M  b^U,  sic  semper      2  probabilius  est  glossema       3  IX-JL^o,  i.  e. 
cameratara,  vel  convexam  (rectius)  ■•  M  ^ii~sui   «_^^j«jJ  '■>  vel 

\^JL:otJ?         6  sic  omues        ^  L  ■^^  fij>        8  L  L-o^\  a  M  v_$j*'» 

^j-^  (sip)       41  M  L  ^UiJ       11  M  L  »U^       12  M  jjii'  sic,  L  JJiJ"? 


14*  Xormal  Text  of  Group  I  [Gen.  18, 6—22] 

^^\     '^^    J  IS.    k^Lo     Jl     Lji.\     J,\     J^>;     (►^yl    tr'^i  6 

^^^L»J    »lk»l^    ''^■^    '^**^J    "^^   J^U  iy^  lJ,1    (•-r^y^   tj*^^3  ^ 

^IS  ^«,«  lysii  (►v'  <*^J>-^-^»  z^-^  kJ'^^  J-?^  5  '^i  l-U-~-  S~^\j  8 

Is^j^f^J'    .^Ua:'   Ui>   (^_)b    J..;*    f-tr-^   '}^    UilS 
j,  2j^b  ^A    \iyt   L*   <jJ  Jls  vilj"\^\  ii;Lo  ^>>,\  <jJ  ^1  JUi  9 

3^yo.^    JjIS    ^^.^-    C^Ji^l    IJ^    Jiu    ^k    cLoT  ^^\   1J\    JUi  10 
Uil    i_;lj    vX-^    1^^    sjl^    cXst.*— )    UD^  j^->\    ^iO\_«\  iijL^ 

•A    !s\Uo  C-^AS•    j»4j^ljl    (i    LoiJi.    Li-Uj    j>,s    LilS  ii\Lj»   ».>ab-i\«   11 

i3>^5  Ci"^'  (i'  *^  L^  O^.  vjy'  ^^^  Lf„^.JJ  ^  CUSLsT^  12 

•Li)  »X9 

>^\  CUs^l    IJsjb   >J-^  ij,    is\j*    rrr*T    o^^'  i.^   "'AJJI  >xii  Jjt  14 

(»-v*^l    (_5-«^   CJ*  ''^'-*=   UlLo   ^_;i-i-^    ,J-«-)  tjjjl    (JUi    17 
Jpj'^l   jB-«\   g,. ,-.  <>o  viJ,L^"«  »_<_<.$'«  (*-»--Ji*   ''i-s^l  ^^^.  *"^*r?'   IB 

^►AbLka.*     (_^>>-U    yXS     ^    jy«U<.     j,oJ^*o     ^';-«o     ii^'^     <■ 'jJI    J'^5    20 

1  L  Ow»-uj  (sic)         s  L  J^l>  2  M  c>>^3  *  L  M  v3y '  5^<^ 

cfr.  V.  12        5  M  —  «!aj\        c  M  *^\         '  M  ^^ 


[Gen.  18,23—33;  50,1—4]     Part  TT,  Section  I  '  15* 

Jul    ^^L-i    ^^i,\±\   ^  jU\    .iLM^"    V    JIS^    c^j^'    ^■^  23 
J^\  ^  2_yi.*i-  NJ^    jM^sa^'t  i^.^xjl  ^3  l^b  ^3,...*^  ^U  ^1   24 

LiiiJl    IJ..A 

\J    JLis   ^.^^1    ^^-^    CjJ^:^3    L-lJli    ^^^    r^j?'    *-<^    ^'^'  29 
j.1^^  ^U  ^_;.^MI  ^Laij^Jl  si-a   c:..Jj3    «li\   lil  Jij   b    JLii  32 

js^-ixjjl    ^J-=^l    CJ'°   '-*^-^'   ^1   (Jbti  i(_.i,j.   ijJUA 
^^^kls:«-J'    kis?   »b\    l^kls:?.  ^^\    ** j-rJaIs:»-J ^    '»->-■r^*   '-*^y.  y°^    ^ 

CUi^i  ^^j-J^L::»-J  ^    ^bl   J^$o   aJJ^    ^\l   Ley.  cr:cajj\    ^  ly^^   3 

^u  ^;^i  uiu  ^;;,^s^  ixji^Nj  LJ.--y.  J  Is  b;^i  ?bl  CUJIju  Oi  4 

^-y^^iili         Oy'j-*        d*^"*^        *3        'y>"         *-0-J«->  (IfS'^A-^        (J 

I  L  !iU.lii.\  2  M  \^*J'  3  M  ^bs.  <  M  JiU.         5  M 

\yis.\  6  M  t«\M  7  K  S'^^i^  (sic)  9  K  in  margine   IXL'^I 

9  K  cr^J*^  (sic) 


16*  Normal  Text  of  Group  I  [Oen.  50, 5— 19] 

^iLJi  (►~jil  Ui'  siJbl  _-Ji\  j^juot  cy^j^  J'-"  6 


O 


lIaa;1^.     ^    l9\i 


,j\   ^i    f.4^1^   ^yu. 


^^..--wks     <>J.i*"M     Cjjl-O.     j^Uo  j^     c'-^^     i*JC«     ^OJ^J>-<»i     9 

6>iJLL»  i^ui  5^>;V\  ^  (3  ^1  v^  ^^  J"^'  ti'  'y'*  10 

fbl  aa.^  ''^^   'SLJl  ij-»*i  *>>-=^  JoJkic  S|,^_ji6  *l.a.^   'doJ* 

Ob^^  y^  (3  ^>^'  r^  O'y"^ 

»L>\  Ij^-^JLJ  \^,xji-D   ""'^^JJI  AjjiH«   -ya^  (j\  i_Lw^  2^^  1^ 

i_i-»i^     ,JjJ    lyis    vJl;U    Jsj"    (.Jbb  \    ^1    c-Ilx.!^    SjtLI    '"^^    Oi    15 
^blj    .<J'3-<    J^"    »..^l    jJbl    ^1     20AJ    lyis^    '-»—'>?.   li'    V-^    1^^ 

j-o.\^\  21^1  j..;^  jj^^  ^r^b  J^"'  o''-"^  ^  ^.  'jJ>*» 

^i  <*J  ULs  M  t_iL«jy.  bLJ 
>i)j.>^  ^  \iy«,  ^  \^lJi^   IB 
Lil   ^\  J,\   J^l  ^^  \^,JxiJ'  ^  eJL-^^.   ^  JL«   19 


'  K  y^a^  (sic  saepius)       '  N  —  Jpj\       »  N  JJi-o^       <  K  ^U»  (sic) 
'  -^'  O^r^*  ^  ^'  —  ^1-^  '  N  4-^"  8  K  ^.^Jift  ^\y  (sic) 

•  N  5(1^  (sic)  10  N  iiwUJ\  n  \^\  sic  omnes;  lege:  (*)'y,  ut 

in  V.  10        iJ  N  >iU>        u  N  ^-o  ^JX*  lyjii^        i<  X  -S^-o  s^Jsji-l 
15  K  in  margine:  ^y>^  fl^"  ^^l  '6  N  ^^JJ\  "  N  ^^  (sic) 

IS  N  U-^        i«  N  \.^.^jS        so  N  —  <»J        si  N  AJJ\ 


[Gen.  50, 20—26]  Part  II,  Section  I  17* 


jy;\  ^;:.^  ^b  J  ;u  ^^\i  ^b  J,  '(^-^.^  (^i  aij  20 

Ij^^    U..^X^     ^^     _i.Lo  ^^5     ■•  Jl-v:».l    iiij'   f'ji'ii'    I— i-»»J_j^,    v3b5    23 

(,-ofc^l  UUo^J   ^_^l  j_yXJI  Ja^^ll  (Jl  ^^"^'   *^*  cy  c^-^j^} 

(j  Sjijajj.*  s^k-ls?    ^^^-L»j    'r**^9    *iLo  (^  I   yb«  i_s.— j^j   CJUi   2(j 

7-^  J=;'  ^  jrr"  ^y^' 


1  N  (►X.fr^UjJ         2  K  lylsxj  (sic)         3  K  N  CU-:-J>l         4  N  4-  oJj 


SECTION  II 

NORMAL  TEXT  OF  GROUP  II 

(MSS.  A,  B,  C,  D,  E.  F,  G) 

J=.jM\^    i*U--Jl   ,OJ\   JX^   ^wV-Jl   t^  1   I 

'i^yjl    ^IS,     ";^\     10^^    <OJ\    Jls,    3 

20^*1    20Uy    ^L.^ 
24Uw»U     23^^.5    SL^I     ^^.^     221^^     jj^     '-'cA^'     '^^     J  ^5    6 

28CU3^"     27^JJ1     ^U\     ^^     iSi\     2r.J^^     SMjJi^    ,JJJ\     jX^j    7 

32jJ^.\     31^^    3n^JJ\    ^U\    ^^^^    29jJi.\ 
J6^    J .    J£^     U...^^     35^\     34j\^^     ,L^    ,xU.l     <OJ\     33^_^^    8 

1  B  0>5U-^\         2  B  CUiir  JsjVlj         3  Fi  (A<?)  R  *^.y>,  Z  D 
^jb    'i^,^  «  K   A.,Xsrv^  M5  ■•  ZZ>DEi   ijjkj\  JUifer^  c  Z 

Z"  D  j*  ">^^  '  Z  D  i3*J>J\  8  Zi  El  ^l-f;},  r  ^.i^  CUJU^ 

9  Ai  F'  El  R  Jiy ,  Zi  ^JUV  .JUiU,  Z  Cj^"  v:^^  "■'  D  oy^ 

I'ZD^y  '^  ^^y  13F'_)^>^;>1  u  Z  o->^>a.  -^ol  .  D  l-L»»a.  d^\ 
i-'  Z  D  R  ^f^i  16  R  —  ^-^  n  Z  D  Bi  Ei  Ui^  18  Z  D  <)o\ 

J^l  LvJ\  U'i>  OJiJIj  ^U3-J\       i9EisU--»      »  A  BRT  J5\  fifJ., 

z  J5M\  f^,  zi  D  J5^\  f3-J\  t^        21  _z  ,^^  o^i■  c>i^  o^» 

»L^1  ia*c^,  Z'  D  idem,  sed  .xl^  loco  CJ^  "  deest  in  R  2'  A 
B  0  E  0^.5  24  z  D  ^J>^_  Oi^i  "  ^'  ^^^  D  IjLJ  (sic) 

20   Z  Zl  D  R    J^^\,  27    D    (_^l  28   Z'    J-«--\    i.;^U  29    Z    OLJJ\ 

3"  B  —  ^J^\  etc.  31  Zl  Uy  i-^Ls  3!  z  C1j*-^K  Ai  -\-  oUJ^  ^^LSLi 
33  Z  V.  8:  ^^--ow  <Jl  ,*aj\  j_5\^3  *U-.J1  <Jl  ^.LJJ\  ^\  U>3;  ])  idem, 
sed  J^\  loco  O'-r^K  et  Ulliw  l,,oo  ^^^--^i^  3i  E  R  ^K*  as  C 

E  R  +  CUi  "3«  1)  ^LiJ\  (.^\.  z  j_,iliJ\  f^  Z'  LjG  Uy.  Z2 


[Gen.  1,9  —  18]  Part  11,  Section  II  19* 

^tt^   Jl    'U-J(    •'^sJ"    3^JJ1    2^UJ1    '5*:^^   ^'    J^"j   !• 

19*.^     18<!^tj^     ^1'ij^     165-;^^.    161^^.^  *J?^5   «M3<-^5   ^'"^^■'■''■^ 


v=r~5 


o-r:^*^"^ 


^J^  ^b:i  jpj\J\  J^  =">Lr^.3  *U--J\  29^1^  ^  ^*lrr^^5  ^^ 
^Iv^l    33^iu_j  ^\j\    32j^\  ^^.^-^ii*    -'c^.^y   «»JJ\  31=^0,  16 

„sr-J^    5X    J>JJ\     33  ^lU-^   _^NJl     32_j^Jl^ 
39^>    38^1    ^l_j^ 


J-i*o\  '^^-r:^'-'  ^  Bi  Fi   Lj«_»i».,  Z  D  p^U-^^  j-o^  e  B  Aji-e.3i\-o, 

Bi  T  >>^1^  5-o-f^-*!  Z  ^U-^l  5-^^.  R  l^^Si-l^  La.*^  '  E  j-^ji^.^ 

»  Z  D  V.  10:  g-«-^^-<  5-il^^  i^v"^*  '^^  O*^^  ^^  ^^i  (Z  Wc 
desinit)         9  D  U>U-4«)\         lu  B'  C  R  ^y^"^  ^  JS^^  "  ^i*'  omnes; 

sed  rectius  ^;S.-i-^  12  R  —  Cj'-^>  u  K  L-i^ft  u  B  —  \ji^  i^^  R 
^Jj^  "«  R  >>Jy.  n  R  +  o^^.  "  F'  <;j?  "  T  —  i^ 

20  R  desunt  omnia  ab    ^_)^^  (j*    in  v.  11    ad  yj>j^^  ^J■*  in   fine  v.  12 

21  T  —  »jj^  22  Fi  »j^  23  ci  T  o'r?:^.  K  ^r^-  '^V'  "  1^  '■r^-ii 
21  R  U^^  20  A'  F'  C  Bi  T  O'-*^,  R  i-<^»  27  D  j^^UjJl,  R 
iCixijbL)-  23  K  Ij-^.  '■■>^%5  29  R  "^^  i3  3"  R  L-^,  ^_55^ 
31  A'  Fi  C<  Bi  T  cr?.r?r^.  C2  ,;_,.;j,-Jij»J\  cr?. j~^ ^  3=  A'  Fi  Bi  T  jXJ\ 
33  AiFi  B'T  i-wliy      31  R  L»^^X>i^      35  R  \^^  U.^      36A'F'Bi 

\^x«)\_j;oj,  R  IkX-c^Xjj       37  R  ^LoJJj        38  R  _  AJJ\       39  Fi  B  >^J->  o^ 


20*  Normal  Text  of  Group  I  J  [Gen.  1, 19-  28] 

24L^,^U:».lS'    24^L^J1^    Lv-^U^U    J,^\)\    23ji^^,    ,)JJI    jXiL^    25 
JS^    -Ol^S-    30j,^^lj    ^\i^\y    ^l^^\     29^,     2..^3-J*    .iU- 

^\^  yi  ;t2L,4^^jaiL  c)J.j\  i(j_yoj  ^l^m\  <oj\  ,31^^  27 

42^^.jit  -"JjJo.  -loU  JS^  ^9J»^^H  »»Jj^  asL^j^jt;^,^ 
1  legas  cum  C  solo:  j/*^;  cf.  supra  v.  11  2  B'  blji.  B»A«T 

jj^,  R  JUi,  A2  >>Aa.  5S\i         c  A'  \jL^         •  R:  j;^  *-Xa.  ^_,..»jo  Js'j 

aj;ji.^l  Uu  flyjl     8  Ai  B'  o'-?'J'>>-'l     '  A  U4r^iw^\^?)     10  R  + 

Is'^.UJl  11  A  F  +  f^T^^bj        12  c  D  LU^ow  viOi  ,UJl  ^\_J5        '3  BR 

^^jL-^  H  DC'  |j>-«a<J*      '*  R  UssJilj  '/-^b  '-r^^       "  R  ,r^^><i^ 

^J\  1-  R  -  0^1       18  R  ,j-^\      '9  R  'JlyJ^  ejV\  Cj\3>  cy 

J^^^^i  2»  B  c>>3^'5  c^iljs,  Bi  T  ^U^'s  f^L"^         2'  J^^  usque 

ad  ^^i  ileest  in  D         22  R  •^\yb         23  R  Jo^a.^  2-r>^         -'  deest  in 
F        2b  R  •^\y(i        26  A'  Fi  Bi  R  T  ULwJl        27Ri^LL«^        28A1F1B 

\y^\^^,    Bl     \^kL-*Xjj  50    R   Ji\l>^  jls.\^\  30    R    Jpy^\     Jfj 

3>  R  <JjJo.  3j  R  jl^         =3  c'  \^^\^.  (■'  UUK  D  iui,  k'M^\,  R 

Lot^iol^      31  c.  D  \^j.^^      35  D  L«3jbjl       36  A"  Fi  i;  R  U»^  liJLwJ^ 
>'  B  R  ;i>U.  38  J{  (^U,^\  Js'^  3a  R  Lj^Lr  J.^,M\5  «o  B  R 

^1  f\y,J\,  Bl  Uk        41  TB3  ^J}s.-Co.        42  B  Ji  J=.j^ll  J* 


[Gen.  1, 29—2, 9]  Part  IT,  Section  IT  21* 

3Ji  2lj^   2y^   ^£5;r*  ^y-^  J^  <U5LX^  j^  U  ^1  JU^  29 

UL*L  UJU  ^yU  £;^.  ^^   is\^-  ^   J  ^5^   Js^  LJ^  J._;M1 
fijj^i    eilb    J<r^    .U-JI    ';>^   Js'}    J:';M1    Ji^^5   f-^»^5   3" 
s^UJa   s_^s    'M5UI   '^..^..ixs  Jfj  iS^  __y-iJ  ^JC^  J=_^\)1  J.S 

^li-^    ^l-w.^    ^\i^    \l=f.  ^^^^^  ^A   lolJU  ^^  U-Xk  <OJ\    ^1^5  31 

l^U^j^^J     ^'5^^5    Jp)^^i     i:l.»^\    OJ^5     1     II 

LV«-^.   ^^J'   A-JJl  tjsjjl  ^_^l  <)JU.»\ 
C^^\    ^X^    j.y.   ^ir   CJ    J^j'^Jl^    *U.-J\   iiJ^   20^1;^   I9Ua  4 

Ujls"  J=)^J1  .Vii.^  ^^^^i  o^*  Cf'°  ^-^-^"  err:*  ■^^^;,  6 
is'L^I   k.»_«o  (^^r^j.*  ^3  ^.ij  J^")"^^   cr*  '^'r^   j^U»^i\l\   J-^=^  <OJIj  7 

25dJU*    jAr>.3    ^3^-i^Jl   ^S^    24^>\|\  ^  U^y   ^^    iJ^\    J_^\^    8 

J?U\    ij;^^   jJi-UJ\    il«3.ii   ii;s^    J?  JpjM\  ^^  i^\   CU^i^  9 


iLfU  ^  ^^yo  ^^^'  iyji  \i^  5  K  ^^Lt,  6  R  CJjJ  ^XJ\  flyjl 
7  A'  Fi  B  T  yii^\  ^.yU-A.,  R  ^.-isLl  ,_-.w^  9  Ai  Fi  T  J-S^,  B  deest 
9  R  deest  lo  R  \>\^  n  R  J^,  u  B  T  Uv^J,  R  (.-«,^.3 

13  R  i^^.JJl  ^U*>  5-;^.^  '<  R  <.4t*-^  '^  R  (►Vi^^  '^  R 

<UJ1    viJ^b^  17   R    i-^SJi^  18    R   UjJjiJti-U  10    B    IJsAj  20    R 

^i-Mj  21  c  J.ii>  t---^s  5<^-«^5  in  parenthesi  22  A'  Fi  Di  j*j>. 

23  jj^  etc.  usque  ad  Js;Ml  j^  deest  in  D       2*  A'  F'  B'  c;>>*  <i  CrCV*^'  (3 

25   A'  Fl    <^  J6   D  _  ^ 


22*  Xormal  Text  of  Group  11  [Gen.  2, 10—21] 

^JUa    ,^^    cr'i^x^^    cri^-r^     'c-cr*^'    Cr-    ^y^-   x*^    ^^i   1" 

cU>   J^    ■'^^>=>-   J=>_;>    e-:^?^  ^^**~'*  **j  -v:;j>-**r:*  Ujo^l  ^  11 

*^>^-ijJ\^   <Ov«^J'    *r?^  ^^y.  ^'---*5  ^*~~^  J=l>"^'  ^-^  I— ~*ij  12 
iL^j.1  ^:>j\  j^^s^  ^3=*-''  y»5  0"^=^  i^"-^'  ;^»-^i  r^'^i  13 

^^>yj>  ^  ^\  f=r-^^  t-::^  ''c^  :yili  f>\  <iJV\  Oy»  ^1^  16 
f^l    j     i-!cAJl5   U3.-U    1' JS'li"  ^J  jliJlj    ^.^'    ifjj^  i^   ,^5    17 

141j^     V.i^\jy^    l^X-    J^lj-    ^JJ\ 

jii^^  »^^5  ^yo,  ^ujv\  ^\  ^...^.  Nj  ^^1  c.y\  JIS5  18 

^^  Js^  lejJi^*  Jo^5  Ji-  ^;.yjl  ^^  is^^l  C^^\  J^^  19 
J-'i^i  '"^f-^*^*  *U.-~J1  21^^  5-:^^>^5  (^'-<=-r"  ^■:^=^  f-^'  er***'^  ^0 

I  B  A'  F'  ^y>A  >B  J-s->JI  ^^^y.^ili,  A  ^;^LsX;ww  J-v->J'  iu  mar- 
line 3  B  notat  J-^jJ*  J"^*  (3*  A  sub  littera  ^  (coptice)  is^.^l,  F 
id.  supra  nomen  scriptum  litteris  copticis        «  A'  F'  B<  j.*a.'^\  (Jj^"^' 

5  A'  Fi  '>^j-?jJ^  J^'^^i  ^  ^^  -^'  ^'  J"*"^^.  '  S  -^'  f''  *^'  ^  J-«*r»^* 
8  C  <Vha:T-Oj  <*J_»jtJ  in  paienthesi,  et  addit:  (^)  •ii«=''V.5  ij  »•»).  —  sic 
saepius  a  A'  Fi   Ji"  J^  y  ^y^\^j3  »ys.vU)  J^  j^^  '<>  B' 

^)^^  (^3)  11  B  4- j-j-v^'  15  kiUls  usque  ad  Lv~*  deest  in  D 

13  Bi  0>^"  ^^  '*  B  ljj>.*^  (sic)         'i  I)    -  <*JV\  16  Ai  Fi  y^\ 

n  A'  j-~>=>»5         "  B  (iUj        13  D  »U-«>1        2u  B  My»-»«)l         21  C  D  E 
^y^        2 J  D  Ji'^        23  c  ->^y.        "  I)  UJ^  (sic)        ■■'s  Ai  Fi 
D  iS)-^\  ^3ic) 


[Gen.  2, 22—3, 9]  Part  ll,  Section  II  23* 

3U^-^^\^  i\jA   ^M   ^^    2i;>^UJl   t^^\    i<)JN\    '^yi    iLixil^  22 

s»l^l  ,_j»j.j  sjjb  ,_5.»i.  cr*  *^i  os-*'^*  cr*  r'=^  o"^'  *'^*  f^*  J  Lai  23 

7^^UjM1   '•c'^.i  ^ji^^ij  i3-^.5  ''^'^  """j'  J^r"  "^y^-  "^^  2'*' 


U^l^  \. 


10 


U^ii^  ^\   J'j^)\   Ji^^j    ^•rM^=^  cr-  ?^=^'  ^^^^  ^'j)  1  III 

j    "^1    _;sA^^    Cj1_^'   s-ci*^   o^    '2Q   il^J  si^i  oJLii  2 

\3yt     ^\3y^     kJ"^     "ilj-JJ     A-Iil     CUJUi  4 

USL^tl    Jii-o   U3-L.   ^;;!ilS'Lj  ^J.J1   f_j^l   J,  ^^1  fr'i^.  aJJI  c;,^5  5 

ajJoi  '^o-rr*^'  y=^  'i-li^  J^UJI  *-^*i  'fr?^''^  ^*  »^^l  Cj1^5  <i 

IGU^JJ^      U=r^      v^Uk*l^      vJ-dS'l^      U=rJy»J"     C^^      Cj->-^^      3^'^-^^ 

i^\   JSli 

^3^5  ^^  J^y    'S^^^Ls  U-Cr^l  L^is^   n|^«>\)i-  U.«3-^»(  CUs:^-'U  7 


LftlJ>U  4  D  L^^  •■'  A  in  margine  scriptum  est,  posteriore  raanu, 

Coptice  et  Arabice;  0'>^^  -^j-JI  ^^  U»->V,  P  idem  Arabice  tantum,  et 
supra  legitur:  (J-«=l,  C  D  UsJ-"-?  j^^  ^jjL\  uSa  ^"^  6  J)  ^^Uyoj 
7  Ai  Pi  UaUS'         8  A  F  ^=:^i)i         9  D  c>^^.f  '"  -A-'  F'  B'  Ci  E' 

^^^L^^a,^.  A2B2C2  j;;\!ls.\i.-u.  "  ^  ^JJ*  12  p  U  13B  0-*  ^*» 
i«  C  UyJljjJu  15  c  cxyiJLj  D  cr:^  16  El  Lv^  "  n  ^^LxiM\ 
(sic)        »8  A'  Pi  B'  D  cP^.f        "  Ai  Pi  Bi  o-^        2"  A'  ^_$>^ 

RhodS|  Arabic  Pentateuch  in  tbe  Church  of  Egypt.  10 


24*  Xormal  Text  of  Group  II  faeu.  8, 10—22] 

'  Ql . « -t,  U 

iSA.\    3\    »\_^\     .^Lii    Ua    >_uX*i     M>UJ    isl_;*iJ    <J^I    Jlii    13 
5.;,-^  j^  7,jx51  iJ^i^  \J.»  culj.3  sM  iLIi'-J  <OMi  JIj^I  JUi  14 

9yb»    L(gl-*J.    liU.^    0^5    ''^r»-'^    C^-:r.i    ^^'-^   ii^l>>-s    S^Jji^l^    15 

^^.jjo  o'r-"^^?  ^Jjo^'j  "^\^\  '1^1  "»r^  il^  JU-^  16 

J^lj"^  ''.ilUjo  j=;Ml  cu;-«J  U^:^,  U^^  jTLi  -ii  ^1  '3aj_^l 

jii\  ^..^.Jj^  J^li^  JiJ  ^^^Iv^.  >il^-i)3  «iU^  18 

OJ^l    e.^1    J*^^*    J»    >jy*i"  J^   '^'^^^^  3;^  ^y^  J>S\3^    19 

*Lo^\JI   5.;^.,^  \\   UJm    iM^  dO'yi    ^\   ^i\   U>5   20 
i'U.43-.*^l5  >^^  ^^   J-;^*/*-    ''^^ij'^  f^'^  ^^^    <^j^^   5-^-«5  21 

201^^  jibj  iUii   iysAJ*   J,l   »jo.  j:^.  ^^M\  ,*Lai 


•  A'  Fi  B  C  D  E  CU-^iX^li  2  A'  F'  B'  U^^  ^^^-^^^^  '  A'  Fi 
j^jjix  C-jLaa.  4  A'  Fi  B  ,_,^!^^1  *  A'  F'  B'  ^  o  A<  'aa  CUJLsJ  M 
r^'-W*    J^    cr"    "-^'    ii^JLU    crtOjSj    ^U  7  I)    ^\   (sic) 

8  A»  Fi  B'  5-;^l^  '  D  E  y*  10  A>  F'  B'  (^)  ^-^         "  A'  Fi : 

j[xS\  ^lJI^;r^\  3>^M  12  A  BFi  cr^--rJ>  "  A' F'  'i^^^^^l  "  E 
liLU-sJ  1;  A'  Fi  B  (^3)  '^^J^$  '«  D  ^5i>.  I'  A'  Fi  B'  L^jb[..^^ 
18  Ai  Fi  B'  ^^^         '■>  A'  Fi  B'  (Jju.,  B^  ^4^_        20  A  B  —  U^ 


[Gen.  3,23—4,  llj  Part  II,  Section  II  25* 


^1  J'^VI  ^  J-.J.J  f^^\  ^y^  cj-  ^'^^  ^y   ''»'=^r^'5  23 

i_j>^.^  i-jL/t^  2   ^^^.Li  i_Jj«.ij.»  «_oi^\    -o^i_i  <>.JLo»  j2_,^_»*)^  fil  rr^i  •^^ 

iuJ^  jys-^  J^.y.  ki^E^J   3jU 
CUsjj    C-JL»^    i^plS   0^55   vJ-J^s*   s^l^l    -11^  f.>\   ^^5   1   IV 

ijjyj  Ub^  ®  J';)'^'  »7*^'  cy  cP*^  s-V  f^''  "^^  o^  ^^  ^ 

lojoby;^ 

•■'L^j.J.t  (J^-*-*  '-^'j  *^^-:A*  c>y^-  '-^^^J^  ^ 

'6^3     l^Lo     Oi     '5JiJ.i     J\    (.^-^"-^J     <»^>    J^U^    Cp^"    J^'    P    8 
(OOii    183^^\    J^U    ^    Jj,'^    fU    '■  Jiil 


( j)  +  v:UiXy-«,  C  D  +  ^ioCUiJo.  ^_$JJ\  iiUi  (D  ^--viJo,!!),  Ci  +  ^(  ^iUj 
(---.1-ICo  4  D  E  ^jp-  ''  Ai  Fi  B  Aa.j)  6  A  Fi  B'  J-*-"-?.,  D 

O^  (sic)        7  Bi  Jsj'iH  c3       8  E  f/J(       9  Ai  Fi  Bi  yi>i,  A2  F2  B' 
^  <UJ\  J--JI5  10  Ci   i-^\f  "  D  ,ji^  (sic)  1'  Ai  Fi  Bi 

^\    viUT   ^^,  viJ^s-vi    i1j'J»=>-'   ->-"    (J    0^5   '^'"^   «-^   wU>*>a.\    ^;;\ 
(Bi  4-  viLJl)  A*^j,  A2  F2  B2  l-»-^.li  ^y^^  (J  0^5  '^*-*^  lJ-^•  '-^^-->-**»^* 


U>L^"  "iUJlj  ^iU  i^\j  ixkiU  cu^3^\      13  E  —  (iUXkiL     n  Bi  Ai 
^\  15  Ai  Fi  Bi  }^\  16  Ai  (J\  n  A'  Bi  iiU.^*  (?,  *U>^1) 

18  E  --  i^\  19  B  E  *i^;=>-l  ">  Fi  ^j^*  21  D  \^j\,  Bi  Fi 

,_^\  ki3=\j  (Fi  —  Lil^)  U\  CUi/^  Jjb       22  B  o"^*^        "  B'  0'>^* 


10* 


26*  Koi-mal  Text  of  Group  H  [Gen.  4,12—24] 


iij4,.uu  ^^i  u^y  vi^J^-  ^\  iy^  M^  3>;^\  ^  J.^.  12 

J  Jsijyo-  J  ^^.^  ^}^  ^  ^^j'  v^yj  cP^'  J"^  13 

■^U-i\  i*.^  ^\ji  J-^  ^^  Js  eUJ-J  ,_^  dJ  Jjyi  JLis  15 
^OoJo.  ^1  ^\  si^NJU  ^'JJ  J*=^  iS'i\  Cjji\i  s^UJ  ^>i»  or* 

^^   'il\^    io.>y   Jp,\  J  ^J:^-^  <UJ1  .(^5  ^^j.  ^JilS  j^^^  16 


l-^^>oL\     ^>^l     ^r-^b     >-*-^* 

U*i  25  Jby  C-^lj  «Jo.>^>5  cr''^»=^  26UiLo  'iJ>^\j>  b\^  ^jl^^   22 

i6.iL«"i)  *UJ  b  20^-^,^  U.^^1  ^5  \JU  b  2;^-\^._j  cU"^  J  1*5  23 

,_^X»kXj   UUi^  2»^_^j^  ^^  CUUS  ^1  ,_^^liJ  U^\ 


1  A'  Fi  Bi  Uis         1  Ai  F'  Bi  ^*J         3  D  A-»<^        <  A'  B  ^i^ 
5D  — f>^\  6  B"  C-w^^  '  B  jU-«»\  (sic)  8CDE<»JLo. 

9  Ai  Fi   'i^\         '0  A  F  >y         11  A'  Fi  Bi  (J)  Jiy\         u  F>  J'^\f 
n  A'  E'  M^  F2  ^1*  D  ^Ij^  i<  Ai  Fi  Ji\^iv-«  D  J.-o.Uv* 

15  A'  Fi  jvoV      16  ABCF  C'U'^       "  D  UAj.a.\      is  D  \5^^\^  (sic) 
19  E  J(y.  JO  Ai  Fi  J5>  21   t'D  JLsy.  "  A'  Fi  C;.Xa.\ 

2'  CDE  yt\j^\  "  ACF  Cj'jLLJJ\  25  c  Jby  D  Jb^. 

26  CD  I^.Lo  "  D  A^l— UJ  A'  Fi  Bi  <)^"i^V  '8  B  ^V** 

2»    A'  Fl      ,_yXj  -«ai  30    D     OJ^  "     -A-l  F'     Oy>JL.-ttfj     i-»^^ 


[Gen.  4, 25—5,  14]  Part  TT,  Section  IT  27* 

^\i   .JJOs   ^JJl    J-oU    4Jj,^    3U.^^   J   ^ui    ,jJJl    £,1    dJiiU 

^xJjl^  i-lxj  *.!)Lo  g^^    Hj^Li    <3jJ^l   ^1  j^ju    fi\   ^LTI    I'-vJUilS'^  4 
^^\    i'j.J«U  ^-_y^X.4A)  ^__y..._^iL»  ^2_y.;J.iLo    iG^Li;,    is^U^   (i 

rj-;^-i-**J    J^*"***?     <^Uo     ^>v^fcO     ^^V'     *^5'     ^^;'    vXjO    j^^     ^^i^L^      l^^S'^    t 

^V3b*.>J>    AJ^ltt    ^wL*^    ^^w%,3»-**Ott    ^^oL«    lT^^'    lJ^     i     ^ 
^_jl^  ft     j^>s-0     vXJala     ^.^vaO 

(-^vJ«Jj\^        22X!>U       f,;-^         J.-vSUi,;rXl       J.J^I        ^\        -'^^JO       j^jb^       Lr''^5       -'^^ 

t._jLOa     ^^y>*.0      cXJ^fft     ^>^.<aJ 

Obcj  '"'crr:'^  '"''*r^*5  '*^'-^   "^f-^^J  ^;^bL*9  ^iTl  '■'f-^.^=>.  Ools'^  14 

I  D  E  .^t^  2  C  D  '■^^'^  E  ^i-^ij  »  A2  F2  ^T  ^UJ 

<  A'  Fi  Bi  ^^^  biy  5  0  D  l^w)o.  (sic)  '  D  *Jl^)^  A"  F"  cr?-^^' 
A2  F2  ii^-ur  A3  F3  JK.  7  B  U:^3  D  <OJ\  U-i\^  »  A  F  D  Jil»  UJj 
9  B  0  D  E  F  jJj  10  C  D  \^}  1 1  oinnes  >-i-^,  sed  vide  vv.  4,  6,  7 
12  Ai  F'  Bi  f>\  J^'^i  "  D  >x)5  u  c  E  '^^P  '5  omnes  ^U  UU^ 
leCDEJx^  nBCDEFJJ^l  is  D  CU^  19  d  —  j^^*^ 
20  D  j-^  j_yo'l        21  B  o-r*-*^        "  B  *-^  (sic  semijer)       23  A  F  t'  E 

^_y^^^,^^  24    D   ^.JXft  25    D   _   ^^i  20    B  E  D    l.*M_»ii.^  27    F 

^J.^U.<3^  et  "i)  supraserijjtum,  igitur  (J.-^'ilU^^^xi,  sio  fere  semper       2S  ]) 


28*  Normal  Text  of  Group  II  [Gen.  5, 15—81] 


^jU    JLU-    iiU     C^L^"     -^^^-Ijw    jJ^l    ^;>>    Jot?    j;,.^   >;b    ^^Is^    19 

•>      L^  ..       ■  >    > 

l^iLt^)     ^y^     d>-^..i>.0     ^j_,.;J^.>.0«       ■  -  Lx^..^.) .      11<>.^L«     Jj^yi^     ij^^i     25 

i5^.>JU*j,    iSU     '^ -Uj    ^iL«V   jJ«l    ^1    '3j^    JJ:^^   ^U^  26 

j>jM\  ^^.  UJU*!  ^^  '-"b:^7^.  'J-*  ^^  '^^y  -W-)*  (_,i-_5  29 
22 u,,^^    2ijbl ■;    li'U-y    jJ^l    ^1    joo   ^;_j^  dUV  ^It^  30 

^_jLO*      jj!-"^^     «>-*'8.     ^w«..vO     ^wsJs.««>Ja 

j^^-Ji-iST  *  D  j:y*  »  D  j^r^*  "^  ^  i^^'  D  iiU-Lj."  :  d 
,_y3  (sic)  8  D  ^.r-*^^  9  B  D  ,_^'-<  '«  A'  Fi  Bi  <>^^  A'  J!i 
LXa.  i.jtij  n   A'  Fi  Bi   ^i-i-.)  j;^-oUJ'j   <)oi.<..u)  iiU  12  D  J-;-**'? 

n  B  C  D  vXJij  ^w«      H  B  ^;^■  D  AiU.;^'  A'  F'  B'  crrr^^  '^^  ^■^^ 

"  C  E  oUj^   D   <^iUj"^  Fi   numeiis  copticis:  18:^  "  E  •^})  A  F 

Jca.^^  (sic)         '9  D  j.y      JO  A'  U^H^^.  A'  bojjo.  Ji  D  A ....■;.   A 

uumeris  copticis:  ")95  '2  D  AJ^  a5I  ,  «  .  ..i  A'  Bi  numeris  copticis: 
776,  770,  777         '<  E  ^^.^.'--..ij  I . >.  < -^ ^ 


[Gen.  5, 32—6, 13]  Part  II,  Section  II  29* 

JUib«    f'-:*-^    f^    CJ"^    *JUV    jJ»U  i^-L^   <>J!'..,— .^^^i-  j_i  ^^IS'    »-^5    32 

j_j-.ixi    CJ    ^>    ^XjO    ^;^5    ^^y\    JJ-J    ^    J'^'^'    ti-'    V^    V'^^b    4 
Hj.r:^l  -Ji-   ^1,    J=._j\J    J.S.   y.^\    Ol^^i-o  i^-J^J^l  V'r'^y^   ^5    S 

^"ill  v_IjJ\  (.Lol  c*..»jo  ^li-j  ^^•'"j  8 

22^_^_^1^  'ilyas  |3NUlr  ^Oljb    LiL^I    ^y    ^IS    ^y    '''JU-tl  Ua^    9 

^-^  j>  J^  o>3  ^^-^  ^^  ^.;'J'  ''o>  ^J'-*'  vLyi  >ji  12 

I  D  \^J^\  ^UJ\  lylS'^         2  D  ^^^  ^  oJ^lj         3  Fi  i^)  LJJ^ 

^^LwS.  «.(^\  15*^^   '.JIjL-b    rfJJI  _^-0  j^  A'    *)<ljlJ\  i_2;Lo  ^_^\    -Co^ll^^  ^j 

C1A2  *iJ\   *Lo\   A3   f-^*^)\   >-o   151   ,^\  )\j^\  *  B  £)(  J,i  D  (_i\ 

Ai  B'  P'  C  D  ^\-^\  Cji-^   CJ"-^  (J*  5  I)  —  UL-^iw         6  B  JUi 

'BCD  ^:;,i->o        8  A  ^M^La      9  A'  Fi  Bi  j^^-^l  j.-*^       lo  D  ^^^y^j 
11  Ai  Fi  B'  ^LUl  12  B  U  E  j^'^Jyt  '^  Ai  F'  B'  ,;jryir<'-^'^  A^ 

*byl\  C  -\-  j^^y^^b  D  4-  j^^U-^ob  u  1)  \j^^  is  Bi    ^j  Fi 

g^«»    M    oJJl    i_-s.-ii^    B'  F2    .iiLiiL   J,    *JJ1    _SL«i  16  B'  Fi    Si^ 

n  B>  Fi   v-aJJI  is   D  +  (jl^   f^Ur^'  "   sic   onines;    B'    A.;-^ 

20  A'  bo>-va  21  B  Ai  Fi  "i^^a.  Bi  Ay-'ot.        22  Ai  Fi  Bi    ^  ^-^y* 

2»  Ai  Fi  Bi  0'->-^       2)  B  E  J,\       25  Bi  ^^)       28  Ai  F'  Bi  ^►^♦JJi 

B2    ^_^jS.\S 


30*  Normal  Text  of  Group  11    [Gen.  6,14—22, 18,1—4] 

2CLUJ1  z-^\^   '^r*-?.  '"^  ^--i-^  cy  ^y  ^^^  ^^'  ^  f-^^  14 

^b     J^^U     A^l^i    J*    Jjy    C^    *<>^;    CLX4    2,iUiJ\     J^l^    16 
UJli'  LsU,^  LJLi-  eisUl,  j^i^   ''<»^-r^«-  ^3  ^cUiJl 

liUJ^  J*i  ^^t  JLJI  .jo  »^\  U  J<r     y    '■- J-»-"  22 
^b   Js.  ^L».yb^  ^^,^  Ly^   j^  .^  <)JJ\    'sjily,   1  XVIII 

^\j     Oi     "><)oL<     ""'Is^    '-^''-rJ'    (J'-=»-j    *-iJ^'    '^j-ojU   ^^^.-L^   J»^»   2 
Ja^Vl    ^J^    -^-^^J    <>0^^>^    v_jb    ,^^     l'^o,=>    £,^\ 


'  Bi  A'  Fi  ^^-^\  BJ  A»r';U:.-,--iJI  0  (in  margine)  y.l>^\  u^--i^ 
^j^y-^.  "SI  ^iJl        »  A'  Fi  B'  CJjve'^*  ^  C  t*-«aJ'  «  A"  F'  Bi 

U\y>  »Ut\  ^»»  O^-i  ■■  '^  <'^'.=^  "  A'  LiXu)  F'  >— ».»'-«^ 

7  A'  Fi  Bi  J^.^V         «  Ai  Fi  B'  (^i\}  A2  F^  \V-  C^l^  »  A'  F'  B' 

*4sJv>o  A'  F2  f.(^Sj>->  10  A«  F'  B'  cUJl  i-ij  u  B'  ^  Sm 

■'■^  Ai  F'  B'  j-^-«=5  •'  T  bl_;-J5  "  T  *^"t-«^  'i  T  IM^  le  T 
»^-vj  u  A»  F'  Syaivi  A2  F»  <*—!_;  ^  T  (^UJJ  18  C"  Fi  T  O^  b 
19  T  ^iULc\  A_»ju  0->^»  ^-:^— ^  o^       -"  '■'  -"^  J-S^       "  T  (J^^l 

22   T    \^3:^J.yU.j\  2,1    X  —  Sjob 


[Gen.  18, 5—14]  Part  11,  Section  It  31* 

^j\     »XL*     Ij^s     'M    ^ya^    SS>    ^jo    |^„<5    ^y^LXi    Ij-^    'J-i-l^    5 
CJJi    •'US'    'IJ-S.*    Jj«i>    2J|.ii    ^j,^ 

ll<J^^l.AJ      l"^*s>^      9L;_v^     SLo^^    Nls*    J>-:L1^    !iyo    Jl      '^^-^ia.!^     7 

*U^^  J^b   15^  U>  JUi  yb  Lil  eUi^^^j  ii^Uo  ^.\  n^  Jlsj  9 
is^UJ^  JjlS  ^^   '"c;'-'>J>  !>>•*  J-^  (3  ^1  S^b  1^'  isjLti  10 

fkiilj    U^^^b'l    J,    U*i,5    U.Li    22^    21^1^  »V,Lwj    20^,^yij    11 

2ni:;-^   24^Lo  Xi 
2e^yl   ^ils  U^-  ^  C^s.-^   25is^L^  1>LJ  <i,-^l^^J  C^yi  JUi   13 

2',^=:;--'  ^U>  J.3  LJI^   2c^ii.^|j  jjT 
2H\bli-  ^1   jr^_^\   oL«^l   U*  2S|3  spi  ^^   ^\^s  <OJI   J.-U   J*   14 


« 


.*J  y  Lai  3  T  —  lii^*  1  T  ^'  Ui'  ■■  C  fU^l  (sic  semper) 

6  T  ,j-"i^3         '  Ai  Fi  B'  C  T  ^^r^'3         8  H'  T  '-rv*-^  '  T  Ua=L) 

10  T  sLXslj  11  Bi  ULai  l^fji-UxJ  <*ol.»jLiJ  C  VyL<  »^J<J-^  <)oU-)LiJ, 
Cl   ib^U  loco  '^_j^Ui   T  LoLai>    i.jtJ.,a^  12  T   >-*-955    (if^-r^L«\    f4^>^^ 

isysxiJI  iXXiyb  13  Ai  F'  Bi  (►4,--^  l;jL>  B^  (►V^  ''>-^*-?  A-  |j^43-<\3ii 
A''   f4:ri_JJ!_   1  jJ.  (?)  14  T   ^U».li    kilo\-^\    ii'^Uo    ^_ji,.   ^^j\    CIjJI   ^ 

NLfls  i5T-)-i(^Uo  i6T+<»J  I7A1  Fi  UjU  j^^\  BI  JjlXJI  j^^l 
T  i(;U^  C^yS>.3  J-^-i^  ?^1  (3  ^::-3yi  '8  T  l-o\  19  T  Jii-b  ^^ 
^^iJ^  i^j^  '—jy^-^i^  i_j^  2u  T  f-c^^T^'  o^i  ^'  B  C  F  —  tils' 

22    T  —   J^9  23    T   +    ^i-«J  '4    T    -lio  25     I'    ^^^.^    ij    ii^,Lui    >J:,J^2=1-^ 

26  T  s>S\  ^II  Lia.  ^yl  27  Ai  Fi  Bi   ^)}^'-         '^^  A'  F'  Bi  £=~lj  til 

J..JLJI   fljj\   ^^  >JU9yi   (Bi  IJjb  (3)  \J^   y^^\         29  T  O^J\   ja-jLw 


32»  Normal  Text  of  Group  II  [Gen.  18, 15—27] 


^  laJi-L^  r*='^*-*  v'-r^V'  *(j-'^5 

lykis-?.  ^\  ij.3Li  ^^  <JvX^  J^'5  'Sr^  cj^J'-r^**'  '*^'  ^cx«-l.*  ^M  19 
(^^j^^  V-y*  5-^-  "'<-^  c^'j  J>J^Li  inyul^j  Cj^I  j^ 

^\  \s.*,  jjLii'  ^\  uj^  j=._;M\  ^i;>  b  dJLJii^  ^'-»-'>  j-^  7^  ' 


(^\  U-^  N  ,.(  J_^  ^  J-a  ^\  ^-^X  u  A'  Bi  \yJ»^}  lyj«i  Ja 

0^\  fU\  UilS  17  T  fJki;i  19  C  <.-rr*^^l  liic  et  deinceps;  ct'r. 

V.  6        19  T  +  (Jj/J         ;o  B  T  ^ilM^. 


Gen.  18,28—33;  50,  1—8]      Part  II,  Sestion  TI  33"* 


■^    J'j^    C^^    ^^-^    ->^=^5    o'^    A^'    J-*^    v.^-^^    ^.  Jl-"   30 

J  Lis  is^,^:^   14,..^  ^=^^    c^l^  o*^  *r«-"  *^*  r^"^   J-^  ^JL"  32 
(J,'   (>-^*ljjl    ''?^^5    f-^*^'^^   ^  <>^US'   ^^  ^ji  LJiJ  ij^y   t_y^^5   33 

AJ-0«     <*.-J.6     ''j_jib»     (J-^il    <^2>.^     ,_^     Ol-cO^      i^Si      ^      ^ 

J^l^-t^l  s^ClNJl  kls^!ib\  l^ils:?.  ^^1  ^;_,.^_kls^-'*  »^'>-<^r»  '-j^y.  ^*3  2 
'0^5    «Cr-kIs.-^J*   fb"l    J.»io    ajj^   3\J    U_^.    CJ^^^I   <^   ^^5   3 

L«0        ^i^y^'.Jt^^^        y^a^        ^^^        <^-J>£ 

>y\_5    ^1     ^>NJ    J.*-ol     2l^\Jlj    ^M    20JUa    ^jjlA-li     ''•'J'jW 
jlJL^^Uxa    ^^' *S    ^.*.>^    ^v^^rw    ^SL^    ^A'O^    sol   ^SvX>J   c-fi-w  y_  vXA^aS     / 

5>t«.jj.^    .^..-ol    CX-o    ^.^^.^^^    AJ^Ll^    L_Lcoy    '-^-^     '-■'ij^^    J^3    8 

1  B  +  j^j^jijjVl^  '  B  +  ;_$J^  W.  ^  Bi  ^to5  4  G  iSbj  D 
ilSoj  s  B'  j^^k-is\^l  cE  j-^s.vXj\  (in  margiiie)  'A'  -l^'?} 
-«M  d^is  s  G  ^;J,Jl-^  5  D  G  —  v-IuAiJ  UJi  10  T  CU-iiiS\ 
'1  D  G  pJ^J^  '2  T  ^.^3  ^  C--i^  ^;>1  ^Is  n  D  ^  '<  T 

^S^L<i\        <5  D  G  T  Ij^'-iXs        16  T  CJ^yJ  >1        "  Ai  F'  B'  ;3s.  ^sl 
18  T  iiJ-^iJ^  (3  ^Ij  13  D  E  G  T  Jpj\  (3  20  T  ^b;j>  ,^.>\ 

21  T  +  (M       22  T  +  ^_5j1       23  T  f-*j*-'->       '^<  T  —  JJ»\      25  T  ^^^l/i 
2G  T  .:Uil=.io         27  D  E  G  J>;\  (3 


34*  Xormal  Text  of  Group  JI  [Gen.  50,9—19] 

^b\     i-jLy.^    UjU    <iy^M    5-^-^5     "IJv.ii.     ''(jVi    U-;Ja» 
9»J>J»      \^Ui      8>lil       ^,>..^<       ia^LLjl      ^UUS'     J:.j\     ^l£w      ^\;j     11 

^^IJLJI    oUi    ^,^\    ^_^>    oUJJ.    ^^^j-.a^\     ioiL».J»6     <)La.Lu 

(^Lo^   Ui"  »^    '3>yj»s^  12 
ii'KLc    c-^^l^l    »\yJ^\    ^JJl     '-'J-ci*^!     '^7^'    (i     '■'''r^>5    13 

<kj>^    l»,>>ji-»a    j^.JJl    f.-^.,.;*.^    <>JJji.\^  ^*    r*^^    ci'    '—*-"'>?.    "?^J5    1"^ 

d^l      ^>      JvJL^       -"^»-<      <*^(      0^>^ 

2'JIS^    .iJli^     J^-    LUiar^^    libl    ^\    lyU,    <J^y>,   J\    261jls?   16 

:'0j:-iJl5  (».<3Xlk^5  (^Lo\  21.,^  ^1  i_i^^^  \y^-  2S^j^  17 
^\     »2j,.^^    aij/Loi    ^    ^\^    j^li    ^•^\^   ^    g^jii  ^jji 

ijijt*  ji_(3^Mi'  sjjv,;*  <— *-^y.  ^^1^^  '^'-^' 
LSI  aIi  Lil   ^M  lyl^'  NJ  i_i-.)y.  (^  JUi  19 

(sic)  8  A  E  F  G  >U>1  T  i^\  B  iUil  a  T  —  »Jj«i  lo  T  IJjb  -^h^^ 
^_y»i  1J^5  O^j"^*  X^  (3  >3->Jl  l-^J"  y*  c^y^"^  •— ■^^^  "  A'  Bi 
^^  12  T  ,jXJ\   sj-a  13  T  (iJbUay   U/  IJ^i.*   iy^>    <0   a-^-oj 

u  B  iyXi>^  o*-*-^^  >>^)'  ti^  »vL»^»  1.'  T  j^l  (-ieUsuJl  lo  T 

D  cr^'^*  "  T  5^;  r^  ^"  '^  '^-^  ='  T  ^>j  UJ  22  T  lyl^ 
\^  Uj  23  T  ^5  T->iJ '  Cr*  Ui_j6  (■t'K-^J  b   LU  jt^_  2«  B  l;^l5b 

25  B  T  +  <>^  26  D  G  ^fLs^i         2T  T  ^U        29  B  lJ.su,  T  \JSjt  ^\ 

D  E  G  >iU  J^  29  T  +  CUil  30  T  ^;^'^J  1^  U^^io  viU  I^ji-Ud  ^^'^ 

31  T  ^    j^l)    istw\  32   Bl  T   >iUj\    <JJl    Jj».\    ^^    viJjs.-^  3>  D  G 

GUi  31  T  <*o^^U.\j  \ylf  >\  35  1)  (i  y  La-j  30  T  liU  l^jvXaJo 


[Gen.  50, 20—26]  Part  IT,  Section  II  35* 


^^\j>    J   ij^Jx^JI    Jju:>.    ,OJI^    "y^k    ^    2^^^l^Xi    j,Jol    lU^l,    20 

■il^is-  U.^  ^  ''Oyo.  ^_^  ,_^1  IJob  ^_^ 
scuIUil^    (►aIJsj    '^"^^^    '■■(^^>    5^^   >^l^  V    ^  JU^  21 

^b^    "^1   ._iJ^\   ^XJI    Jp^^Jl   J,l  J=jNJ\  »ij6  ^^  <^.>.*^.5 

S-jy^.5  J^^'i  rr?*'^' 

Sjiji^^    23^^U;,-c'  Cffr^'**'    'V'^i    '*"'^'^    "'i3  >*5  '— ''-^>?.  O^t^  26 

j^'^l  fyJ\  J,l  ^^j-o^l  2  A'  F'  Bi  (J,  J^  .UJlj  p^^  J,  ^,-X.».«J6 

j-vs?Jb  3  Ai  Fi  Bi  JyiJ.  <  D  G  \j^  s  i)  (;  bl^  o  T  f^yl 
^  T>  G  f^yj^  8  B'  T  f-«3-?y^"  J*  <J^^  »  D  Ji'^  '°  G  ij'^} 
11  T  fl^t  ,_5-o        i2D^-^t.l        i3BDGTi>>l        iiT^3J.^ivi^ 

{i.yi.r>.  y_^\)      15  T  O^'-^  (^jJl  ^^"  <*^"y>-l  i_Lw^.  I vkli.^      16  D  + 

My  n  T  +  Ua-^  's  T  l^i-^i^U  \>[jiSi\  dJJl  19  D  —  j^^-* 

20  E  l-ot  D  G  U«^  21  T  j^\  22  G  !Sj^*5  23  T  ^1)  kisvi 


SECTION  III. 
TEXT  OF  MS.  VATIC.  LIBR.  AR.  2  (S). 

JUj^  <*JJ>  ^ljj2  j-^*  ^=?-3  ij*  f^5  iy=r^*-**'•  k'^^U  J=)Ml  vJUJlS^   2 

;y    ^Ki  ;y   ^^^   ^\    JLii   3 

fUkJl     ^^^5    ^^\     j;_y-0      <0JI      J-^5     Jvl^     )yJ\      3'     ''^^^      r'^-**     4 

fU  ^^   *L-o    U^U   ^^.^5    iUJI    k^^    j_j  LLvO   j^XJ  <O.Jl   ijlits  6 

jj^  ^i  ^\  ,)JJ\ 

j^^j    Xi^\    ^^    3j-«J'    iU— J\   JsU*^    (3  _jlji\    ^;;,^-XJ   <*AJl    Jljij    1-4 
j^  L«lj\^  Ijli^l^  OL?.'    *C>^}  tJ^^ 

\j\y\    ^^^.^   15 


v.AMA.riMJa 


[Gen.  1,16— 31]  Part  II,  Section  lit  37* 

^i\^\^  j^\  1^^  kiLja)  yLoV>  ^1^ 

LaoK  L<»j.  _L*./o  cj^i  iL*.^  o'^i  1'' 

.-^ki   -Uj.    *Jo>.    ^^*^   5^    ^'-«*'    s'-r*-'*   cr*    5-*^   *-*^'    (JL"  -" 

.  i.\..f^\  J>U»o  iUUs  JjjNl  ^ 

L,^^^    f^Ur?    U^l-^"^    i^    L»)y>-j    J=;'^l    rr^''    ''^^   J*""  -■* 

,.^^>  3'^  U=iL;-oM  ^l^Jl^  *iLLoV  J=_)M1  ,_A^^  ''-^l  5^^  25 

kil.»^  ,_^  ^jX*vo    U^,.-^^    Loj_j.«aj  LJUvJI  2-L/a<Ui  ^l  ijlj^  2t) 
L_-^jJ\    ^Lo^    Jf,ji\    gti^^j    r'Ur^ll^    *U-*Jl    _;<J>5  ^sr^J\ 

l^^jXla-   ,_j-iJ\^   \-Si  JJiXal.  (>-^^l   *3?^  '*-'jy^    f*'   "^^   (3^^  27 

31^5  =Jp)')\   ^l^^l^  Ij^'l    ^OJI    Uvl    J^5    *JJ'    U4=-^    >iJ;lj5  28 

^y^\  j^Uo^  iUf-vv^Jl  .>jj^  T*^^  iii.^>-*)  ^fr  \_jJjXtoU  L*yU^\. 

ij=y"^^  ij-*  >^->  L*  jiL*.)^  £U--*J\  ^j^  5-r;-»-=^5  J*^"^'  iy'*-^3  ^-^T^i  '^" 

—  L— o    ^;^6j    .eL.^^   0°3    ''^-^'  >^-^^  A.J«X.o    Ix    ^<^.«.::>.    ^\  ^JJ I   (»-)^*  31 


V  J*      2  V  u^Lu.N      3  V  j:.;^!  \y;:e5  l^j-iS'l^ 


38*  Text  of  MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  At:  2  (S)  [Gen.  2, 1—18] 

f^'        l3      J^^       ^>wJl-U3      ^JJl        (Jjuji.        JjL-J\      fyj\      ^      dsJJ\      J-^5      '2 

<)JJI    j-L^    -f^.    -^    UiXsL    i\    >>y^'i    xU-^l    ij^^ly    ^    iijb   4 
^L^l   V5  J=y\)l   J*  «ONJl  ^\  J^.  f  0..^>.  ^1  J^  ^y^\ 

dJtXa.  ^JJ\  f>l  ^U*  yl^^  la^  ^^,>j  ^j  UU^  aJM\  <0J\  ^y^  8 
UJi^U  u-^It^  U^,k^  cr^=^  V?^  3  *-«^"^'  ^-0  ^Vl  ,OJl  CXJU  9 
-.liJU    r:^'    <>>j_s»-c   s.s:*^»    ^lyLil    U..«   ^j  *v;i^^   *T?^* 

j^\  »;'^.  _>JyJI  p  J-;^  J»,M1  aJu  ._^>^  12 

d.Ju^\   j,j\  5.;:*^  ^^^'  y^5  cJ^^^^  ^'^^  ^Li^M   (.^Ij   13 

^4^lj  J-*'^'  ^L^r^  ^ij_;^>— J*  yo^  *-^-^  CU)LiJ\  y^l  i;,^!^   14 

OIt*-!'  y*  t?V 
k,l^«s-<^j  U,.=^-^  C>^  c>'-^  i  V*5  f^*  <JJ^\  ^\  Js^li  15 
^^^^  JJLxiJ  ^U4\  ys^  5.;^.^  ^;^  ^.IS  ^>\  .jJMI  <0J\  _^\j   16 


•    '  (legendum:  J^^y^o^^^a.')  V  ^J^^y.^  '  V  ^y.  '  (legendum: 


[Gen.  2, 19—25;  3, 1—9]       Part  II,  Section  III  39* 


iU-J>   ^5    xl^ar^J*    ^p.i-_5    5^:>.    i^^NJl  ^^    <»JM1    <OJ\    ^:i^    19 

^_^a.^    f.-.,.!;.^     j:L,_i*Jl     »-vL«     aiUn-Jl     '  J,^sr?     *L».^1     ^>\     ,__y»*oli    20 
>>.^^  ^ftU-ol  ^-f^  jij^a.!^  i-i-ls    ^l-ii    fi\    ^    IjUx«j  (i.J'i)!    <*JJ1    fi'^ts    iil 

yM  (J\  L<^  j_yU  isM^l   pM  ^^  J.r;.l  ^\  fX-^Jl  ^Ml  cOJl  ^^  22 

^^L>^"    U..;^^   iilj-»^    j^UjiXII    J  lis   4 

j;\^  _^k;HJJ    il^ri  JSLJl    iLJj,    is'^sA^'    ^1    ii'l^^l    Oi^    L:Ui  6 
UyijLj  CUiitl^  OJ^li   Uj-Ji'  (^-c   CjJ^^I    iliojUJ   !sl^»X*   'iyS^^'^ 

^Uil  ^sr*   ^^   U-i  <)^W»  <*JJ\    loj^  c^  -^^^^5)5  f^* 


1  V  5^^-»3c0  2  V  (►iift  <^\  3  V  \J>JiJ^  4  sic;  V  J-S'Li 

10  v  *JUs 

Bhodb,  Arabic  Fentateacii  in  the  Cliurc)i  of  Egypt  *  11 


40*  T,j-t  of  MS.    Vatir.  Libr.  Ar.  3  (S)      [Gen.  3,  Ui— 24  ;  4,  1] 


2^U*iJi   'i\y^\   .::J'-ii   'c:-jo^  \i'-.  ii^  dJMi   aJJ\  Jls  13 
js'J  b\y,  ai^  ^^.x^  j^5  3i^3^\  j^^  j_^^  f^UrrJ* 

yb   '-<j)-»J  ,^~^^  CU-«.J    cJ-~??   i^T-vJ'   Cr^i   '^'^?    ''i'»>>i    J"*^^*^    1'"' 

>"^^M\  ^:,^.JJ3■  ^L:..»j.   >iu.»^.  viui-i.-*  ^^^M  'i^j^  J ^5  16 

.iCU4^  ^>Jl  ij^-^^  ^  .S^Jili  viU^^j  Jy  .lUJoJi  il  J'Ji  ,>^^   17 
^^J^r^   JStJ"    iLv^    ^^^-^---^    ixJ\)\    ii»jiJ^    'jjgj^   JSb"   M   ^IS 

^\   ix>Ml   Jl    ^^;    -^-^  J\   ,ULJ1   JSli   6^,^;,^  J^^-    19 
J^   3  ;\    exits    UjSl    *1^    3J^.j;,    ,M    ,_^5    20 

U^y^vwJl^  jj^  >— >'-^  '*^-^5)^  r^^  "^"^^  *^*  5-^-^5  21 
^\    AJjj«-«  ^3  *<i^>L«    j^j^l^S'  jLo  j-j"   y»    \iyb  <OM(  <JJJI  JlS^  22 

Uij\  is'Uii  *r^  »^~*  ->^^.»  *-^.  '>-*^.  ^  ^j^.  c>^^;  x"^^: 
U^x.   J^l  ,_yXj\  L,>)i\     JlLJ  ^j«i  ^U=j.  ^;,.x  <OM\  ^1  »i^  23 
iL^l   *'■?**'    L^?."^   \»iis.i<:'^    "'»_,Jjui<o    '"i^i-ww 

CJUs     ^IS     CJJJ55     CJ>*3:*     ''^^Jij     ^'i^      "v-S;*      "f>'5    1    n' 

I  V  (.lUXjii  2  V  *^>  u-IJUibI  »  sic;  V  6\^ii-oJ\  *  sic; 

V  »yj>*  '  V  —  iLss—ojSj  «  V   liCsJI  7   V   —  ^;r;^a-  '  sic; 

V  1^      «  V  j_^r^  i»^-Xw\       10  V  i_-CLiC;-«  ^J^-~^       "  V  fj\  >-»j*5 


[Gen.  4, 2— 20J  Part  U,  Section  III  41* 

^U  o-^lj'5    c-^  ,_^>j     Jjl-*   c^*^    J^*^    "^^^^     0->J>i   0.>_5lji    p'   :^ 
<JJJ   *J^V?    i^^'^J'  ^'  cr*  OJ-^'^  LX**   ?^''    ■^'^    \J>^  '-"^   3 

>jl^     J^Lk=L    ^UJJ^    'cr--=-^-    (1    C>S    ^==-'^    'cr-^--    o'    ^-'^    ^ 


aJI 


(*.-Ji*  kLtvJo   vJUiU  isiLo   viX^la 


JjLa  Jl   ^li  fli-   ..1^=^-"   j  Likf  UJls  »U.I   JjU   ^^ilS  J^li-  p  8 

f>    CjJ^^s    tali    CUs^  ^1     *^;>\il    ^.^    .JUil    ^^*i^    ^Ml^  11 

^3   0>5o    lj6L>^    L»6L>^    Ijtlyi    eX^Juo    i^LaJ'   Us   ixi>^)l    JJ.!>    ^2_jli  12 

yiJ^,  ^\  ^  ^\  ^3  il\  J:>\i  JIS  13 
(_y^^^.   (jj^^ii   C^  ^  O^i   cPp^    J.   '->-^'-'    "^Li    ^^1^ 

0>^   C^J'^    V    J'^W    ?^^   *^'    ?''^*   C--^   C?^^   2/^5  1*' 

Ujki   ^iJjiX-*   i^j-^  *J  r?'^   Cj^^J^?  cui-».s*  «^j^i.«j  ^^^lJ  59 U^  1 7 

J-^lii^i«   o-J^I    J^Us^^    J-t^"-;;*^    '''>-J3>   ^^^  ji;^i  -^5   P  1*^ 


2  V  ^JL)i  U\  3  sic;  V  jX^\  i  V  JUJJ 


11* 


42*  Te.rt  of  MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  3  (S)     [Qen.  4, 21—26;  5, 1—10] 

_jLi>JJ\^  ^^>JJ»J>    J-»a.    j^    Jp   ^»    J'j^.    <*-:^*    (•—''^    ^1 

jo.jJ.\^  tr''^^*  A.j>-.;-o  I  f-'j^  J-*-s-«>  cy-''-i^y  CjjJj  i-^.l  ^5  i!:i 

C-JIS.   l-L<-io  <»>.«-»j1  »IU6>^  Lo\   OjJ^  "^-^^^   '-^.'  f*'    ^C*^55  2"' 

■j^ls^  Alxs  >1  '"'Jj.'-*  J>v  _r^'  '^■'^  "^^^  i_r^};  ^*  ''^^ 
x.^jjo\    JoS.^,.->,    J^y(  <i^^,^l   s^^  ^\  ^j  toil   o---uJ^ 


•2ii 


,UJ\    ^,^b    iiUjJb 


i^Lu«  i;»-^^  i>J«l«  ^ow>  ix^  jjL»j  UC»^  i>J»l  be  Aju  ,>\  i_r^^5  'i 
li'   <>wL»j   jj_j.-^iXJ'^  <>^<L.j    <>.i-e  ».v«J    L<j-^b  ,__yXJl    (•>'   fb'l   g...«s>  C>^i    ^ 

Jy 

>2^yl    i-ijJ^b  err^    "^r— ^5  ^^  --^r^  ^-^^  6 
(>J^l3  ^^>^>L*o    ft^A^a    ^Xro    /^i-flJ   ij^y'     ^Xj*i    '•'*  vX»->    C^^--.-^   ^ob»    < 

Zj    <^J.-^    i -.CC^   i_5^^3    '*-'^    <*J^    ^.u^    CZ.-v,<^    f  b  \    s.^_«.d>   ^r~>K»   8 

1  V  g*«-TO         2  V  <^;;^\^  :i  sic;  V  U^b         4  V  ^■iii.'^x  Si* 

»  V  e»y^  6  sic;  V  J^U  7  V  ^^\S  s  v  U^^  s  l.^";>H 

10  i»>«-«.«n  11  ^_,..  <-^^  12  IjJjli,  sequent!  lineu  ,_yjy  "  Oniissi 

sunt  vv.  11,  12,  13;  sic  jjinbabillter  supplenda:  ^yl  ?lj(  Z!:'"^  ■— -b^  U 
CrS*^"**'  C)'"^  J^^i  '2  i3^"  ^'  crtj-b-j  b..  «-^,^  ^J.4u  <*jt-o  j.^' 
^Uj    Jj.UJ-«3^    jJ^l    bo    >Xj«j    C>^-^   i_A'*3    !■*     J-?.^^'-M»-*    jJ«l-i  ^^-^->-' 

^^Lo*   (>^,^k^  tXl«i«   ^«*-*o   ^.^oo\i» 


[Gen.  5,  14—32;  6, 1]  Part  II,  Section  III  43* 

xb    »>J^li   ^v-L»j   ^.^^5   ._y^->^    J-^.^-^s-*   i^'^J  15 

j-.,sj«.i*»j'«    L<.  c-^ »    ^,1*0    ii-c    ^U-3    J^.^^'-^i-*   ^}   5-v*^  CUiKs  17 

^-j^JLi    i>,J«l^    rf^-U^    ^i^    0>'"*^    Ti^^    ^■xi^   l-^   j,jL5   >)lj  ^^'■^  19 

^^.vo  |^.^vX..vj  ft  U,<»,.»  -^  ft  d-..^A^  d^X^  kil^o   ^  <>-<^»  » ^  I  ^''^■«>^  d>o  oIa  2 3 

*, ;Lo*    iVj-'*-'^    v-XJ^ift    ^wa-*aj 

ij^b«  f''^*-^  fL»*'  ^^-5  i^-Jftl  i*-L.»j  ^^  ^j.<.^.«,r>.  j^^l  _^  jL.o  L^Llj  32 


1  1  jJ_5\       2  i-y^^       ^  *\Lo)ji«       4  ^T*?.      '  >J^3 


44*  Text  of  MS.  Vatic.  Lihr.  Ar.  2  (S)         [Qen.  6,2—15] 

•^y*  r^  o"^  "^-^^   c,-*5  r^."^'  ^^^"  j>  V*-^  ^>>"^'  li'  ^"^5  ^ 
^^  IvJ'S  ^JJl   »*•  5jl./vi>.  «-(^  C!-*-'^  ^L«J\  OL-^  ,j^  -ljiiL.> 

aU— 'I    -'^^i  yfcjJI   fJwXJ 

<»-Jji  jj   »-^'5   ^^^3  J'j^'  (3  j^Luo'S)!   jX-o  il  <»JU1  ^jJS  H 
4^k^i  J=y"^>  '*^^«  J*  0-*  ^-^^^i^J^  v^'JJ'    ^;jU^V\  '"y^^  "UJl  JUs   7 

<^l  j^Jj  Ih-^  ^^^  r^^  ^ 

cuib^    >'^5  ?'— '  o-r^  <*^.^"  jJ^U  10 

I'O^U^*  '>\  ^^i  cr-:^  crr^ir^  ->  J^^  '-'^  ->^  C-^  "^^  ^"^  ^^ 
^^5  J^l.>  ^^— :  Iat^*  C1.'L«LJ>  jL>..,,/o  ,_^~:-i.  Ijy'j'  cU  wX^l   14 

.  , .  ..  '      -  ^\ 

1  \^J.s?Jl3  2  y^i  '  ^^j^i  4  ^-<ii.  sic.  Omittendum;  videtur 
esse  glossema,  ad  explicaiidum  iram  Dei,  scil.  <*-«>  "exarsit",  tandem  ex 
margine  iuvectum   in   ipsum  textum'  '  \^tsv«l  e  <».«  a->,    sic! 

"  fli.,  sed  cfr.  supra  V.  32  '  ^J^,>.XLi^  i  ^lUJJ^l^         m  O-^-^** 


[Gen.  6,  16—22;  18,  1—9]     Part  ll,  Section  III  45* 

bb   I43J    r-J^j   .^XjJI  ^-j^  l^gXCSo  *Ui  ^'»    '■'•t:-^  OybsXJ  ;-^^l«   16 

L«3.3oUiJ'  c:^l_ji'_j   ^l_jj'3   J-il-^'   Ua-oLa.  ^^ 
^^j    i^   ^^  ^    JU*NJ    J=;NJ1     J.»     Ul      o'^jk^      CjI     Lil     U5    17 

LtL&^   d^^>o   js^^mO  ft 
ii>  J^'^f'.  J^>    cr"   ^^'53'  r^-l'    «■:^=^    cy°    Cj=-    ^    c^i  ^9 

cU    >j,^S^    ^XL.J1    <C^3    jSy.    fUk    ^    ^^^    oU    3.-^   c^\^  21 
L.^r'i^Jl  t_jl^  ^^l-^  ^*j  ^^-^  J^y-?  c^  "^-^^  *■-'  J-?^3  1   XV  III 

_^  I,  '^ 

viSJi    Aaj    l^-vi«J"    pi'   (»-5b_jAJ'    Ugj    1^A-U*JJ    ;.^  iy^    j»5j   ,J!sl^    o 
si;;ij"  J^b   ^s_j-^^l   J '^3  i';'-^  ij'  * >y<>-J'^  ijl    (.-^IjjI  tr^^  ^ 

^^-o     ^>     Jj>^^     i.J^^     ^Xi\     J-s:*-''^     bLJ^     l-U».w    J>.^l    p   8 
Uil   jj  ,_5*b«i  ijli   kiUii..«i3  isjl^w  j^_\   lyis   I'i  9 


'  ^■''-Tr*'  ^  CU-Ol^  3  '^  sequenti  linea  <>JL;.*o  <  .>,s.\.*05 


46*  Text  of  MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  (S)     [Gen.  18, 10—26] 


S)  li  v:;^*^-  ^^^~:^  o'   ->-*?*   *^.^   '^x— »-'  j  »;-^ 


"-^^ 


fiU.  Ul  U  »^U»  cr*  '->'  ^-i^i^^  ^\  J  Us  17 

"i^Jj    ^Uhftsr?.     -.Is    sj^jo     .iJobl.     d^^wO      .^»-ww^    <>J\     »J>il    L)l.  19 
,Jo   SJvi.   '-<    »-0«>l_^V  <»JJ1    larS.  i^^iLa.    »^'5  J>''^W  'y^*-»^   "'^^ 

l^Xij.  i^^.^ht  ,>jJ    '^j^jii^ii..   -is'  >^U«  f^'J>-»^  r'"**  ^^^  (JUi  "iO 

^IkJl  »x  JLaJl  >iU4^'  L-Jot  J  Is,  ^yl  fJLiUi  23 

M   JUJ\   j,^,^   ^U.t  -iU^  ..luJl  JlkJ^  ^U»J\  ^yUi  JUJ\ 

i»^'.   j   'J-Lo  ^^.. =;.    ,..>--■    j    ".Ij->-^5    o-'    ^^'    ''^   J  lis  26 

«   *\^^  »  J.»-rf  s  l^ha-c-?.  •    ,.  (j •;  .U<  !■  deest 


[Gen.  18,  27—33;  50, 1—9]   Part  IT,  Section  III  47* 

1^1    (_$>>->.   cr-^   fU^\    (^   0'>^^    ■^   lift*  (Jlj^   «— jb\  jj  1  do  la.!  '27 

l^».^^l    .^...;-<^     Liliv>>    *-«-»iJ.    O^-^'J^^.    lil-o  j^j-o^^il    JjJ    28 

M   JLs  oy^J*    "^'-^    ^=>-y.    C^*    i.s-'^*    J'-"    "^^    '-^.'    ■*5'^5    -^ 
'^  ^^^^,  ^^1  ,_j^s  <i^Ul  ^^3  ^^^  (.^liJl  J,  :'*.:u-oo«l  jji  JL»^  31 

<^J|^^   jjl    jij.,    -_-jh^l»    ~^l-jl    ^M5   j^j^    ^ji    L^   d.l}\    i^.<i^    33 
■''Jj^'i   d<,sit   (_|-^   i*-ol    <*«ij.3    ,_^   k_i.vo^.    ^>_-^li    1    L 

i^Mi   c:JJis^  6gui    6i_^s-?.  ^1   lXlnji    i^.y^   >-i--y.  ^'5  2 
^\   ^i  JIS5  ^_jiy  JT  i_k--y.  10^  <)^iSo   fij.i    ^Oj^.   dj  4 

^    W-^^S    C>**r*   (_j-«J^    ^A-i»    Uisw   0>X=>-5 

?=m'5  1-5^'  c*^'^  ^*^*  o^J'^  o^*^  ->^  (3  iJ   '■'<*-^./ 

i:'CUL^   U^  v^Jljl   i^^^li   >>.3i^l    oy'J^   J^*   '' 
>  in  margine  +  |^_y.--JOj\^  2  ^;_,.-vXJj  ^^i"  ^j,^^  3  CU^jijI 


48*  Text  of  MS.  Vatic.  Libr.  Ar.  2  (S)      [Gen.  50, 10-22] 

^lj\     *.Jl.«-w     L>fi»-     ^'-oM     S'*-^}    l^X^        ■'\_;jiU^^       1  »  _« ht 

JL«.<y<oJ\    ijli^    ^i    '^y^^i     cJ^*-^     '"J'j*     (J'     ^".y^     "^-^^i  1^ 

i^Jj  »^.»^  c--:^  ^-^"-^y. 


10  W  jJl>        II  AV  <.-:^j?l  sic  semper      n  W  ^JJ/**  cr*       '^  W  +  >X*-o 

n  W  f-ta^i  vib^'i)  ^jjtX^ol        1  s  \v  ^^  jvi,^' ^^ \  viUu«J        laW^Lji 
JO  W   *U.^  21    \V    AiJ\    ^_sl^\   ,^^1  22   \V    »J'j  ^  -'  W  )'^ 


[Gen.  50, 23— 26j  Part  II,  Section  III  49* 


\JUJ^\    i^\     '_^>;^Lo    -"yj    Uv.\  :< Lilly     2^.^J     r?V^     'vibj    -3 

Ja^>5     '^'."(-^I^^J    r^"(    ^^\  sj'/Jl    Jl    ^J=_;^-"    'ii^   CJ- 

f^r>.\    *^J>-»J.          "  '\\'  +   (JLaJ  12   W   ^xiUkaj           la  W  —  Lot   ,^ 
14   ^^           15  W   0>?^' 


SECTION  IV 
TEXT  OF  MS.  BODL.  LIBR.  HUNT.  424  (X) 

ri-'cJ^iJ   <Wl^  (J^s*-*'   3^5   <>-^-ii-^  ^«  ii^sr^  -^  J"^^'  C-JIS5   2 

^\  ^IXs  ^1  ^JLJ  .UJ\  JU5  3 
ijJiJlj  yiii\  ^_o  U-^  <UJ\  J-os\^  'J^^  *J*  y^'  'i^*  r^'^  ■* 
U».U-s3    ^Is^     i'ow.^    Ci'^5    "^^     <*-»JJiJ\     It^.     'I'-feJ    v^l    W-/05  5 

^^    U^   ^LoU    ^^JLJ,    ^UJ>    i^5   ^   IjJ^   <^;XJ  dOJI  Jl»5  6 

jJil      CUS?     ^JJ\      i:UJ\      ^..O      U-j     ^\     J-=^'5     JJ4>     <«^l     f^^S      ' 

^u^  ^1 — «  ^is^  LL->a.  aj>  <uii  ^-oj(^  iU-:  jJ4»  <)aj\  l;--^  8 

Lob'  Lco   l->.l,».o 

*U— Jl  i:^s?  ^iJl  ^UJI  .z-*^^}  ^SS  J6^  i.^U(  _;43i^5 

iL-oLJl  Cjrj^i>}  ajkLsT"  ,J> 
<JJJ\   y^\^    \jis^    kL^MI    s-cla:*    U;>»  J=,\    * jUI  <0J\  L^^^  10 

^ij>.    ^    »^jj    lylj    ^^i^^^-ioi.    '-^LJ    J>j^J\    ty^"^  "^^   J^3  ^^ 
^  <>JuUo    ,_^  ^^  Sjjj  \^'  gjLo  (-..Ju  '^^5    <Mj.^»  A  «■•«> 

<»>~-^-=^  ^i-^  ^  A-^  »;P  \;jlj  ^i:..;>i..a.  "^Cjl^  J^j"^'  ^::-^Jj«^   12 

UJli'  'Lcy_  U.U-0  ^IS_5  *Uw<  ^^IS,  13 
I  i.  e.  iljJoVl  2  ^y-^^.  '  ?^-?.  *  C^^  '  iJj'--^ 


[Gen.  1,14—28]  Part  11,  Section  IT  51* 

^j_^    [.,^\   jJw^   j,    2^JLJ    J,lAi    <^;JI    JI93,     '<sJJ\     ixli_5  !•* 

OUb^    ^\J1    ^1   J*=^5  ^^JiAJ\   cr?.xr^'  '^^  (3^5  16 

f^S^'5    J^\    OUob^  ^i-oNJI   _^IJ15  ^l4=-J\ 
J^jMl    ^s.   j^^yiiJ"    ^_jla.    iU— J(    >>J.=w    ^    ^\    UaJl-^ij    17 

jji  isjiUj  j^^li^   i-^   t/'?-^   ^^'^•*  ^^^^l  jr^   "^^  *J^i  20 


j=j^J\  ^  ^\  j^^\  ^i^5  /^>  ^ 

U^a.  villi  <i^xJl  ^^^l^  U3..*v^s-?  J=j\il  u^.^5  "^^^^  d^^'i  25 

j;_)l-X..^    ^_^»    ^j_-J^    Lv(g_«-io5  iXi^yai   |^l-*Ji    "j-^Na-J  dJJ  \    J  Ij" «  2*) 

i2Loly5  l4^*  l-:Jy:--'5  J';M1  L^l^  l;-^!^  ^*il  ^ilS  Lm^^^jU,  28 
J>j^)l  ij.6  iJ\j^\  olfUJI  _jiLo  ,Jj>3  J>,\)1  *IlS 

'  rubro  colore,  glossema        2  ^^^        a  probabilius  addendum  est 
»  ij^b        °.f>?.        '"  rubro  colore,  glossemu        "  ^».^J^       12  \ya\3^ 


52*      Text  of  MS.  Bodf  Libr.  Hutd.  4?4  (X)     [Gen.  1,  29—31 ;  2,  X-  n  1 

^^  CjvO  ajI>  JsJj  *U*JI  j^  /''-~J5  J'j"^*  ^.^=^5  i-y*^}  30 

7"=*^'      v^-^-^=>-      J^5      *4=>-     ,,T~*J      ''krj'i     j    ^^    JV"^*    *^5 

l*4,Xij.j  5-^»=?-^   J'^'^'i    iU-^>   CU)^3o^   ^^irL  J-^    1    II 
aUI    ^joI    Uy.     ^^     ^..^    J'J^^^i     ^U-^^-ll     0>y    '—'^    '-^*  4 


Ji  C-w^.  ^1    J^'3   Jiil  iyijL  iili'  JJLJ.I   j  ^.^^-oj.  ^;^l    J^5  5 
^LS-    fiN)^    \^    J>y\    J^  ^k-\   L.  «)JJ\    ^M     >b^l    ^^yilLyi^a. 

>^    ^^\^    <)J^   JS"^J\   jJLs»  ^1   Ji^  Ci^   )^  Js  j^;jl_)_jj\^  9 

,_^aJJI    J^yi_   >i)Ujb    J^-L^^JI    jJj     Uai>     •'^<»5 


'  i.  e.  \S.it^        2  ^\>       J  l4^\^       4  jj  etc.  usque  ad  J-^"\  colore 
rnlji-o  scripta  sunt  '  sic  6  co"loie  rubro  itorum  '  ^1^  (sic) 

8  Ujb«>.^l  9  w>J-(^\  jJlj  Los\  j_yfc^  glossema 


[Gen.  2,  12—20;  3, 1]  Part  II,  Section  IV 


53" 


k'l^l   5^'y   _;43-^*    iT^S 
^^^^Jl   ^5^v»  (3  *Xaa.^  i.'iX:L   ^i.Jt  ^LvJMl  <A.^JI  (_l)yi  S.^\^    15 

Aha  :?-?■»    ^i.«.A^ 

Ji-U   J^^  ^y/Jl  tj  >y  J^  Cr*  ^-^*^^"  f>>   -^J^-"*  sV    'i^^5'5   16 
Uy,   U^.l   ^_,i.s  ,i^X/*   JiLi   ^)  j^'^  j-f:^*   ^j"^.   ^J-J'    •'^^^   O''^    1" 

2gX.oXJi  5^i>.^  ^LwJ"^\  ^^.  c>^  •>-^  ^*  ^-~-:J  <*J"^-'^  V^y*  J'^^    '8 

U^l    ^^     ^^     \ys^'^^     J'y^'-i     t-y-=^     ^)    '*^'    d^^'i    1^ 

L^<-».)\  y^jj   ^^.-^   L*.J.i  <kj 
J^y^}    Z-:r^=^i    ;^1<.^1    ;^t    ^ISJ^    j,iL%-Jl    iU.-^l    ^il    L^^,   2tJ 

Ua.1^  3L«i^  J^^l^  ^t;i  ^jjl  Cjly^  f>\  ^  .^Jlsc-^  ^JJl  ^as  21 

•H'l^l    U3.6J0I5  ^M    ^^    »J.^l    ^J.Jl    jX-iJl    ,i^W\  Oyi   LjoI^  22 

^"    ^     (3-^^.5     <*^'«      ^S'-^'      ^LvJVl     JyO     »_.^,;.-*J\     \J^J«1     Jj».l      ^^.,^5     24 

Urwlj    J..w.:=.    ^U)NJI    U_jJo.5 
J»;Vl     (3     ^_,XJI    ^5a-y\    g>i.»a.    ^^    *Ji»3  ^1    ilil    C-ol^3    1     III 

<OJ\  Jlii  1>LJ  ii'y\U   ili\  cuJUi  Uii,\ll  ^yi   Lvi)^   o^Jl 

•^J^   ^^  Nbo   V   (^ 


I    j_j'«33    (sic)  -    (;_,Jl-a-^  3   L»JJi  1    i*.t^I>\  s    'i\\y^\ 

U-laft        '  liUJJi  usque  ad  AoI^Ij  omittenda        s   <*^\         »  ^>-J^ 


54"^  Text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Sunt.  424  (X)     [Gen.  3,2-17] 

^yyUl  j,   iiy.    iJS  ,^  J^li  ^1  U^  jS  ils^J  »\^M\  cuJUi  2 
^Uli  V  <JJJ1   JlS   ^y_;iJI   i>--5  j,  ^  ^\  >y^\  »;-*i'  or*  '^^  3 

Ij^  O^^   '^  is^_j-eVJ   ili\  CJLils  4 
UpJLUil   ^^~-«^'   Ua-^  ^IJ"   ^y.  UjJ  Zs,t  <*jl  viUi^   5 

..3,     ,k^     Ji-\U     Ul=j.      ''^^l     ^\     ls\^^J\     0_;-Oili     6 

ii^^-^   ^w«   la,^   Ikli*  ^b^U   Im>^I    ^ji}  U*:^  L»j(,T-^'  CUsr^->la  7 

Ugj  ly;^;-^!^  UtlkXi*  cr?.;i^  H=-'  "^^s  c^-^^ 

Cjya     ii».«.<.o»     ■'(3*7?     l/^J^t'"''^     ij      ''')'-•     *-^^     Ov^    Lj«.«-»o     ^ «. V    8 

^^>_aJI    ,^r^    ^-^    U~;i  Ua"^1   St-'t'^    "^5 
^bji    ^NJ     O-^i*     ^o.>JJ\    fi,   UiiU    liUi^-o   CUj«.»x«)    JUi   K) 
CsiSl    all    ^J_^    ^by^   viXil    ^y^l    ^^-^    J^»   ]*   JJJI   <JJ   JUi    11 

^xil>\    ilil   il_^NJ>    >.:uJUi   Ua  ..UJjii  ^  iyUJ  <)JJ1  JUi  13 

c::J^li 

j;^    C-ol     ii_jj«Jwc    IJ^A    CUU.S     >J->M     ^>-^^    U.4.V1    i_l>yi    JUi    14 

c>)^^   J.S.   ^^.^_>i>.»;;i  j=jNJl  Ji^i^5  ^U>  0^5  (^Ua-JI  5-:^^^ 

(JoUi    ^,X/oJ>    CUiU    OLwU     »>-o_J     l^aJ-**^^    L^gJ-wJ^ 

^^ojjj  o^^^'^i  Vtt^  '^7-^--=^5  '^r^  Jr^^  ^y^-^  J  ^5  16 

'  J^  bis       2  IJ36        =  efr.  II,  9       <  p"  etc.  usque  ad  Jj*j?,  colore 
rubro  scripta,  omittenda        '  5^        *  »\\-<t"iH         "  v^ ,. »>gruj 


Gen.  3, 18— 24;  4, 1—10]      Part  IT,  Section  IV  55* 

JiJ.1  ^,Arr>i^  J^^'j  ^^.^..^o,  \S^  CU  CXUj^  18 
^■^^^   ^*   J!;'J>    J'   ^^'   J   J>   ^>^   J^^   ^^^^<:^  6j^.i   19 

l.-^VI  ^5Lo  5:1   \jj^)  k'Ua.  djy.!   ^:^\  U>3  2(J 

.A>xJ\    (jl    L^^-5    J^'-?.5   isl-ri'    ■>_^   i;^   J> -^l  .^   sjo    v>^'   UiJ 
^1     J:._;NJ1     J->*.J     j..;^^!      'Vy/    Cr^    ^J^J*    sV*     3<*^yLls    23 

i'L-jLl    >^    i3?^   ki.sir^'    A.ttk.a.;.„.l  I    i,^>j^^  \ 
•''LL»i..X.Mjl  iJUJls^  c?-^-'^"  ^>^55  OJ-«.s*  \_jik.  AJ'\-<il  ji>\  ^^  li"    1   IV 

^^■j;^^    J='j'^*    O't^J    1:^--°    '*JJ    * ijS    i:,--oli    ^\    ^LjI    J^jo    iJjJ,s?    .S 

CUkiuo^     \J.^     ^^yi     ^L»    slj.l^    (Jl     "^5    O-r:?.'^'    li'    j-^r.    ^^3    ^ 

i_ukiC«j   >X3   ^5  Lil^  L«j,»i^  0;-~»  fJ  cx4^  ^'^^'^  'Hr'*  Jlji*  6 
<».XXiii   i-^~^    J^}^   <J'    J=-^    C>-^^   o'    .Ljui.^1    (3   tils' 

j-«Jl  ^_jaI  c-^J  JUi  J^l  J-oLa  ^*  ^\  i:^-^UJ  .iJJ\  JUii  9 


I 


l.><s^l^         ■:  ^^        ^  .*.^^ji.li  etc.  usque  ad  ^f>ji  rubro  colore 
distincta         *  ^yj\SJ\         s  sic  6  ^^ilMs 

Bhose,  Arabic  Pentateuch  iu  tLo  Church  of  Egjit.  12 


56*  Text  of  MS.  BoHl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424  (X)       [Gen.  4,  11— 26;  5, 1] 

^>    CUJl^5    UU    vJU«=^    2^1    j>y4\    ^w.   ,JUi\   ^yJ-    »^MU   11 

ci  ^r^  o'  C--  c^>  c^  '»J'-''  sV^  cr^.l^   J^  13 
jJjLo    ^;~JlJ>   JJJCi    j^   Ji  IJ.X*   ^^    ^_j^  *J"^\  Jjyi  JUi    15 

^Lo y^   Cy^-^   '-"-^^   i_r^V^   '*^  0->J«i  ..lUJi-js?  <So\-«l  j^^^^.l*  '-*t*3    1  7 

^yi\    d^^l    jfwb   1^1  ,  --'J 
J^iiyL.  J..-j>'^l4^  ^^5  J^^oM^L^x  ^'^^  JJ^^  •l*^^*^  cPy*  J5)J5   1^ 

^;^-^'^\  <_j,Ua*ll  j,  ^~^' — U  b»  ^;^15  IJjb  ^  J-Jy.  <Ui\  OjJy  20 
Aijj«H.J\^  r*r^'  *-'''  r*^'  i3>^'  o^  '•^*  J'^y  ^"^'  r^'^  21 

^IsT^    J«<1*     il^Xji.     iiiJi^b    b\po    jUai    J-fJy     OjJ^    »U-o^    22 

<i>.  •»>    J~^i>J    C-,->.U    Jo^xi.\k 

^^j^ls  <)d;oi  ^JJl  J-^^-*  J»y  ^1  ^ii-~-J  (J  f^^  <*^l  >£>*  aJj'j 
».w\  iyjo   ^\   i_,^^^   IjvA  ^y^  <J^.,-^I   Ujj  Lo\    •>c-..*-iJ  ^L-oj  26 

ijy^  f>\  ^yj  <*^l  3^^  ^>^*    f>rr'*  t3  tr**^'  v:;i>^  k-i*"*^  \Jub   1    V 

<OJ\ 


'  O^  ''  yj'^^  '  U*.^*.'  *  J-;^y.  sed  cfr.  v.  22 

fXa.\^         0  v.:X-j^,  sed  cfr.  V,  3,  4  sqq. 


[(Jen.  6, 2—21]  Part  II,  Section  IV  57* 


o 


^^Loa     ^^-^.aaJ     j..«X*     Loitt    ^«*..**J    <^3 L.9.A..M.O    ljJ3.J».-*..ij.;^    ^l!--.>^»W    (»».i  '     d-J)^^*^5     ^ 

i/^Loli   <^   ^55   ^>^-**j    i^^>-s»-i*--> tt    <^,.Lt^    ^^L*   ij^^     lJ^    5 

iJjLo  ^  ^yL.uj  -xixft  (»)  ^,Lw  i)k.!>Lo  j-cvo  v_)Lols  ^l.'  L«  g.>^r>.  jj_>fe«   14 
[i^b  <^J  j-J^j  *.-Uj  i^,^;^*^^    i.c».^^fi.    J.i\IU.«3^  ''lT''^^  1'^] 

aJ  jJ^^  a.X*v  ^Lo  i^L^i  j.^:L\  <^J  >xJ«  L«  ij^Aj  ^^j^  ijb  ^'^5  19 

^'^3   C>3-*^ 

'  3^>.=»-  2  Hie  incipit  vetustior  pars  manuscripti  '  Hio  versus, 
fallente  baud  dubie  oculo,  praetermissus  est  in  manuscripto  *  ^^iXi^ 
5  ^y>.^'Sy         6  vel   »-^? 

12* 


o8*        Tfxt  of  MS.  BoiU.  JAhr.  Hunt.  424  (X)     [Gen.  5,22— 32;  6. 1—4] 

aJ    ^j    'w«   jo«o    ^^   J-''^}  ^^    f^'^   ^^-y^  ^y^^^  CJ-'^^i  -'- 

*j_^   '^w;^Xw^  <>..>.>.ir^^  ii>L»i:)j'  ^»-^'  flj*  g..»-^  ^;^ls^  '23 

lljfc.    U.>.JI    ^\     -<)^Jii^^  <UJ1    ^w>o    ^^~o   AJ^-^   r?-^'   Cf'**^'^   ^^ 

Lol   <0  jJ*s   aJ-^j    ^^;^Uj'^  ^-_»-o'\^   ii'oo  cUJ  1^1*5   -8 

,UJ\  '^^...oJ  ,_^\  ^i^Ml 
...  .-^^    iiLv-     ,.'..=^.    _v    aJ    jJ»    U    >>-jus     ..-->    viUJ    ,  i>U»  30 

A./L>o     ,-»..ot->-»i«      ^•^'^*'     '*i'-<     5-^-*^'     i^^-»J     ^•^■*     '-*     g.«;<J^.     v^'^*    31 
viUsb.     f '-=^;     f '-~'     <*J     ^•►^     <*.-^     iOLc    ^..  <,rv,     '  j^>  1     _v>    ^;JlS«    32 

^jj\  iij^u^oLo  ^j^i  Mjti^^iLjicu^  i->jv^:  i-^iy^,,  2 

t^^    "Ui^'l^  £,^1  iMJj^  '-''c;^--^  c>-^l  J-^'  J^l 

^|_y^;>wC»»--«-J   1  ^J^JI        S-SUil         1>V~«        ^i"^^        '-***^ 

1  ^^.«.>«)^  '-  dJujS         3  j^«^L»J^  4  melius:  Lojjo ,  sed  cfr. 

DofY,    Supplement    aux    Dictionnaires    Arabos,    9.    v.    *i^,    consolatio 
^     ^y»^>^^^  c  desuiit  in  textii  "  ^^  '  Jj'^  usque  ad  O'-^ 

,_J-oU :  superscriptio  duabus  lineis  in  mauuscriplo  exprcssa  '  J"?^! 

10  ^_^         u  forsan  cr;o,lSV        u  l^^j        u  ,_^        u  ^\        1;  j^jL-^a. 

"  Cr??.'^  fortasse? 


[Gen.  6,5— 20]  Part  II,  Section  IV  59* 


3y>l   JJ^  31  <UJ1    2,_i*gU  6 
[AJU*b   dJj  dJJ\  ,_^^.  ^U  !iajM  9] 

12^-  12J:,^N)\   12^.;^.^   12  J^  0->.-^  J^  JyV\   ^1^  aji  ^1   ^1,5   12 


^UH     i:',iiXi'    .iUiJI    fX-ol^    i_...-ioi.    ^.^     tsai    C^\    ^    5-UsU    14 
1^^'". ».T^  ^^^^^^  "db^  iiU-Xlo  (i^J^t  it.^^^xj^  jXXjUI  j-UsI  \JX«,«  1o 

21Jj.\)l^    k^^NJI^    Ji--o^J>    Li'lib'l     ^ilAiJI    fU-ol^ 

CSJ    '*r^    i^     >-^  '^^^Tr'   J'j"^'    (J^    '■'•    o'-'^i^J*     J-**'_j*    (j-^^   ^'^ 

(J=)V1     ^S     ( )>     L»K     >_»■<>.  .^  a      l.»_^\     ij^^     »L»i.\ 

^yi    v^jljt^  'r-i^^-rr*^  cUJJl    J^il   cf-r^'*  cj-r^^    H"  <s'^  ^i  '^' 

(^^-wb  j-^.<j-o\  <v.  «.>..»'-4   j^llxl\  jj_j^  i^U  L«a  Cjb^ 
^^w^M    <)^x.^   J'^'^J^   vj^  ^^    U^  0-<5    lv«— ^-   i<wioLJ\  ^^J   20 

1  ^bLkiL^  2  oi-^li  3  desunt  verba:  laV^K  3S»n;i  y"i»3 

*  i^^\,  fj^l^SX:^         ■■  i^laJ^JI^        6  ^1        '  (.y'^^        '  desunt  verba: 
ni  n'l^W  n^K         '  etiam  hie  versus  mancus  'u  sic!         "  i.  e.  ^^V-~a\ 

12  oniittenda         n  ^^ib"        '<  (iJJ»\^        i5  j-^bi.        16  ^-j^yj^        17  ^lj> 
18  X^j^f  his        i»  b\j>\^>  Bic        '»  ^1        Ji  Li*^'j 


60*      Text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  EuiU.  424  (X)     [Gen.  6, 21— 22;  18, 1-14] 

^_ftJ^\    UjJ   J'^i    iliiJi    J-=^*''    h^    (J*    J^-*.5    1*-^*;^*    d.T**''^   ^ 

Jl      ,)^>.      ^..y^      J^^     Ij^      JUJ\       "^^....^.       J\        ;..^^^\       ,_,^5     7 

d^jk^^^    CX^5    O '"'   ^'^-^^    ^^    (_)-»^    Tt^^    >1^5    1*-^     '"i.T*    '"^^    ^ 


•••  I 


iliiJI    ^    ,^    »4aJ    Jli    Clj\_^\    is^Uo    ^^.l    <iJ   \^IS    j^j"   9 
^   ,_^^    ^1    ;=.y    Jj'XIl     '3J^\    ^^  ^^^\    \J^    jiU   l^lii    10 

j^-;*  ii"-XXx~.<  u*^  sj'.-j  cu.i>..>~.>3  jJJ  »jJj"  Uo^  tjJ^  l-<3-*-«^  *^r^' 

£LM,^JJi    ^^..^.^.^o    v^hXJKJ 

lil^  ^T   i6^"l  i6^3a.\  CUJIS^  sjLo  c,^;^?^  ^  li-r^T?"^  "^^  J'^  13 
s  \^h V««iU  '  <>J>l9L>  (5iir);  forsan  ^^.l-^.  aut  ^^'^Xjo^'?)  s  ^..oI 


[Gen.  18, 15— 31]  Part  TT,  Section  TV  61* 


J-ail  ^^1  jojl  U  (.-^jJ^  ^>^■^*  c-'*  (_r*^*  "^  JL"  17 

^\    sj>.j>j    ^^yo    *--^    J-*'^    '^■^■r^    i_y^>?-  ^'    <*^^    u'''    cy°  ■^•* 

')!  fl  Jl  j-ji-o  U^  ^*\  lyjLS  L<   (c^^J  ^,Jii\  J^\  21 

iJJ\  f\S^  Usl^  -.^_^1  0*^5  22 

^li»-J^^  ;\^M1  ai.t.j    A:^-!^    :i^^^ij  ill;  li.  Jlj'5  -►.:e'7^'  ^■^'  23 

>Lc)^  t_)'rJ  b\   Up'^    (_5J^    f'^s  jJ-S31  1^1  Cj'j^^   ^s   ^»_>1  JLii  27 

^^^.^JL>\\^  A  <»■  «-i     Ua--J  ^IS    nJ    <OJl    J  Lii    U.Lo    |j_y.;0>J)l»    <>  ...  «-ti 
^;_,^.    ^   <UJl    Jl»   o^.^»    Ut^:^   ^^^IS    ^^li    i_l,j    b    »^*^>    JUi   31 

6    ^b».  7    \^AJIJ  S    ^^ 


62*    Text  of  MS.  Bodl.  Libr.  Hunt.  424  (X)   [Gen.  15,32-33;  50, 1-18] 

dS.^^  i_|L.o  yb^  <J^l  A^^  ^  ^-r^  ^-^^y.  0*^5   1   ^ 
Jo.    ^-J»la:^'\    j.b'\    J^"    ^J>i'   AjN    Uy.  crC^;'    ''^    ■'5^=^*5    ^ 

Ley      ,^w.O>.^.«^      r-^^^     t.i^^     ^^^^ 
<i>^       0»*r»       J^-^-^       ^j.-oU.      i_A»^»J,      lj''^5       <iJo»L<«       fb\        3lJi.-OJjlj     4 

^y-jJ  i_jJ»»  »3^  ^j.^  J  c-Jls 

^y^     J^-y^      ^^^       --V*^     J'"'^^      <*wA-<^      V_i.»Oy      ^JL'OJ      7 

\y^  b..y   d)U»  i^=wUi  ^>^M\  ^  ^5  ,_^JJ\    '^U,\  ^^\  J\   ly\^    10 
^\    r'"'^  Sj^^.  g-OM-)^  <.lU>  «-wl    ly>    viUi    J-^l    i;j^    7"^^    J-*^ 

i.Ji— jy   ^^_w<    I'l^LL  CjL*  vXji   »Ab\   j^l  t_L»>!ni    »yH    "^'^|)    UJ9   li> 
UiLX.^,^  <i.j   sUX^   L^    Loy   P^Jb   LU.il£b   ^_iu/j«j  J-"-'  ^^'^^ 

'  sic  2  \^   JxXi\^  3  (_j,..aiij\^  «   J'^'^  '  *>?^  '  C.)'-^''^ 

•  iU.1  ^  j»lV  »  forsan  ^JJ>  ^--o-*  Oj*"  '  *tf^  '"  il) 

11  ylsk. 


[Gen.  50,  16—26]  Part  II,  Section  IV  fiS'' 


LJ    J'jj    <^^yo   J---S    ULJi^  ^b\   ^\    ^    ^^^'-^i  ^-*--^y.  (J'   1^^  16 

_0J.U    tMj«^l     ,.a.    j^.s     '  ^^\     pC/o;Jl5     jJl^^Lj     ^i_».;^.J    IJyi  17 
<-A^yi,   >SL^   ^ilibl    ^OJ\    ^J^   ^i    3j,^^   LJ  ^ij^    lie    2_ji.«j" 

dw.«lj>jl  \^>>,3:^*  18 

i3>^^.  ij-'  1^==^  x"^  ^  ^"^  "^'^  J^  ^  '~^  l_j^.«-»43^  (»X)'  I   L<l^  20 

CUjU-LU   «.aU-^«    ~X^IaI   »-^^=^.  -iLojdal  b'l  ^-Jjl  v_Sva-  ^3  o"^'^  -^ 

^^la.   (jjllj'    »4y-^  ^1^    (^.'t^'    i_s^'    "-^5   >xJ^2  !S,>.J«  <_suw_jj^  1^'^^  23 

^^l  1 ■>-"f.5  i3^^'5  f-^r?"^    i-i-J-a.  ^J^Jl    J'j"^^   (J'   J')'^'    "'-'^ 

^    ti^a.::^^    X^iiXs*    I^,^^L*J    r<*^3    kiUo    ''^^^  I     ^^^    i— i.-~>^,    Obo«  26 


'   forsan  ^  fva-ol  2  l^ijij  3  ,>.sxXs?  «  yo  •  ^LS' 


llr^S  '    1 >»jl-i'  9 


^^j..-^!    ^JJ    ^-;-»»J(    f-> 


xi.«A»o'rv<.5:3&tiiJ&fA.«->  -»•- 


U^.     '  » 


fOJUm  »  OlfO^lE'rt^tA.lCMOV-  V 


liilil.  Vat,  Copt,  2,  i<. 


s 


M 
^ 


/ 


Printed  by  W.  Drugulin  Leipzig  (Germany). 


IRRARV 


^^^ 


4 


^SOUTHERN  teol°!  ?'"o""a 


ericB  ^--w_ 


,*»fHFR^, 


0     000  464  38' 


1 


Univers 

Sout 

Lit 


